An inside view of the Vatican Council, in the speech of the Most Reverend Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis

GIFT OF

THOMAS FORD BACON

MEMORIAL LIBRARY

AN INSIDE VIEW

OF THE

VATICAN COUNCIL,

IN THE SPEECH
OF THE MOST REVEREND

ARCHBISHOP KENRICK,

OF ST. LOUIS.
EDITED BY

LEONARD WOOLSEY BACON,
WITH NOTES AND ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS,

INCLUDING :

THE SYLLABUS OF HIS HOLINESS PIUS IX.

THE PROTEST OF FATHER HYACINTHE.

THE PROTEST AND SPEECHES OF BISHOP STEOSSMAYER.

THE APOCRYPHAL "SPEECH OF A BISHOP.*'

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL.

THE APPEAL OF FATHER HYACINTHE.

THE DECLARATION OF DR. DOLLINGER AND HIS ASSOCIATES.

THE PROGRAMME CF THE ANTI-INFALLIBILITY, LEAGUE.

AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY,

150 NASSAU-STREET, NEW YORK.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

THE MATERIALS FOE THE HISTORY OF THE

COUNCIL.
Secrecy of Proceedings — Contradictory Statements- -A Decisive
Document pages 5-13

CHAPTER II.
THE OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL.

The "Liberal Catholic" Party— Its Principles and its Men —
Speeches of Montalembert— The Absolutist Party— Its Princi-
ples as denned by the Prince de Broglie— Encyclical "Quanta
Cuba," and Syllabus - 14-49

CHAPTER III.

THE PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL.

Hopeful Expectations of the Liberal Catholics— Packing of Pre-
paratory Committees— Manipulating of Public Opinion— Plan
of Acclamation — Publication of Janus — Muzzling of the Press at
Rome — Gratry's Letters — Fatheb Hyacinthe's Pbotest- 50-60

CHAPTER IV.
THE COMPOSITION OF THE COUNCIL.

Modern Revolution in the Constitution of the Episcopate— Present
Dependence of the Bishops on "the Nod" of the Pope— Insig-
nificant Minority in the Church represented by an Overwhelm-
ing Majority in the Council - 61-65

CHAPTER V.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL.

First Code of Rules imposed on the Council— Second Code— Ex-
tinction of Conciliar Liberty— Protest of the Minority- - 66-70

CHAPTER VI.
THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL.

First Schema submitted, attacked by Conolly and Strossmayer,
and withdrawn — Schwarzenberg's Desires for Reformation —

284720

4 CONTENTS.

Strossmayer's Second Speech— Decree for Infallibility pro-
posed— Great Speech of Strossmayeb — Immense Uproar —
Deceitful Trick of the Managers — "Observations" of the
Bishops — Decree passed by a Majority — Protest of the Mi-
nority 71 -87

CHAPTER VII.

THE SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK.

[See Contents and Analysis on pp. 93, 91] 88-174

CHAPTER VIII.

AN APOCRYPHAL SPEECH.

Italian Origin of the Document— Relations of the Imposture to
the Example and Moral Teachings of the Roman-catholic
Church— The Pretended "Speech oar a Bishop in tiik Coun-
cil m— No Papacy in the New Testament — Nor in Early Church
History— la Peter the Rock ?— Former Popes Fallible— Peril of
the Church 175 196

CHAPTER IX.

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL.

The two Dogmatic Constitutions— Canons on the Catholic Faith—
Constitution on the Church— Chapter III. : On the Power and
Nature of the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff — Chapter 1Y. :
Concerning the Infallible Teaching of the Roman Pontiff —
Retroactive Effect of these Decrees — Former ex cathedra Teach-
ings now declared Infallible— I. Bull, Unam Sanctam — II. Bull,
Cum ex Apostolatus Officio — HI. Bull, In Ccena Domini— IV. En-
cyclical, Quanta Cura, and Syllabus — Former Atrocities of Popes
now justified — 196-215

CHAPTER X.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL.

Temporary Distraction of Men's Minds from Religious Subjects —
Measures of the Court of Rome for conciliating or whipping
in the Minority — The Quinquennial Faculties — Father Hya-
cinthe's Appeal to the Bishops — Dollinger's Letter to his
Archbishop — Political Bearings of the Infallibility Decree —
Declaration of Dollinger and his Associates — Anathema
and Excommunication — Programme of the ANTi-lNFALLrBrLiTY
League— The Conflict Begun - 216-250

THE

VATICAN COUNCIL.

- CHAPTER I.

THE MATEKIALS FOR THE HISTORY OF
THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The Vatican Council of the year 1870, an event of in-
terest to all, and especially to those of every Christian
communion, who love the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus
Christ on the earth, is nevertheless the one event of re-
cent times, the history of which is most disputed and
most studiously concealed from the knowledge of the
public.

The Council was organized as a "secret society." At
the opening of it an awful obligation was imposed, un-
der severe penalty, " subpcena gram," on all its members,
binding them to absolute secrecy in everything pertain-
ing to the Council. The members were not allowed to
communicate even with each other in print. Meetings
for consultation of members speaking the same lan-
guage, were interdicted. Owing to the extraordinary
acoustical properties of the hall of the Council, it was
rare that the transactions were heard, except by a small

fi, : TCE VATICAN COUNCIL.

part of the members. The stenographic reports of daily
proceedings, transacted in an unfamiliar language, were
not printed, nor otherwise submitted to the members
of the Council, whether for their information or for the
correction of the record.*

In view of these facts, the bitter complaints of the
bishops belonging to the majority, and in particular of
Archbishop Manning, of Westminster, f of the incorrect-
ness of the published accounts of the assembly.
actually childish. To stimulate public curiosity and
interest by every device of advertising — by announce-
ments and manifestoes, by parades, processions, cos-
tumes, tableaux, and fireworks, attracting a crowd from
every part of the world to the doors of the Council, and
then complain that the event was reported in the news-
papers ; to lock the doors in the face of the public and
shut off access to information by oaths of secrecy, and
then complain that the reports are not exacts— is " like
children crying in the market-place." If they wanted
no reports, why all this advertising of a free show of
parades, pantomimes, and pyrotechny to gather the
loungers of two hemispheres in the piazza of St. Peter's ?
Why not go quietly about their business, and have done
with it ? If they wanted to be correctly reported, why
not admit witnesses, or remove the seal of secrecy ? The

* Ce qui se passe an Concile, 48, 59, 62. The trustworthiness of
this.work is disputed by interested parties, and indorsed by others.
The above statements, however, as well as most other statements
made in it, do not depend on the authority of the writer, but are
sustained by reference to unimpeachable authorities.

t See his Pastoral, "The Vatican Council," pp. 1-33. Petri
Privilegium, 3. One of the last acts of the Council was to adopt
a violent protest against the reports in circulation concerning its
doings. Ibid. 181. This protest, says Dr. Manning, was adopted
"by an immense majority :" implying that a minority more or less
considerable declined to impugn the correctness of the reports.

MATERIALS FOR ITS HISTORY. 7

conclusion is inevitable : what the managers of the
Council wanted was to be incorrectly reported. The
thing which they had taken pains to secure was the
wide circulation of partial information about their pro-
ceedings. The thing which they had studied to prevent
was the statement of the whole tr^uth.

And yet, in the sweeping denunciation of all reports,
of the Council as utterly untrustworthy and misleading,
is to be remarked one significant exception. While the
correspondence of the British newspapers is declared
to be simply imaginative, founded on no authentic
knowledge of the facts whatever, it is confessed that
" the journals of Catholic countries," and especially the
Augsburg Gazette, " understood what they were pervert-
ing ; and that they had obtained their knowledge from
sources which could only have been opened to them by
violation of duty."* By this admission, the defenders
of the Council against the charges of contemporaneous
history waive the claim of superior knowledge, and re-
solve the question at issue into a simple question of
veracity between themselves and certain of their col-
leagues and associates. The number of the witnesses
is understood to be "by an immense majority" in favor
of the Council. But the weight of their testimony is
inevitably affected by the two facts : first, that interests
which they deem infinite are pending on their being be-
lieved ; and secondly, that authority which they hold
to be infallible justifies them in acts of deception for
the advantage of the Church, f

* Archbishop Manning, of Westminster, Petri Privilegium, 3,
pp. 2, 4.

f S. Alphonsi de Lig. Compend. Theologice Moralis, auct. Ney-
raguet, 141. "Z>e cequivocatione ." It is certified by the pope,
ex cathedra, that the writings of this saint contain nothing contrary
to sound doctrine. The distinguished Father Newman has, in his

8 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Having these considerations in view, we may fairly
weigh the various external testimonies to the character
of the Vatican Council. These may be represented on
the one side by two famous volumes " Ce qui se passe
au Concile,"* (Doings in the Council,) and the "Letters
of Quirinus ;"f on tliQ other side by the pastoral letter
of Archbishop Manning, one of the ablest leaders of the
majority of the Council. J

The former are lull and detailed histories, not impar-
tial indeed, but accurate and exact for the most part, in
speaking of matters on which we have the means i >!
ingthem, and affording thus a fair presumption in their
favor as to matters on which the more than Masonic
secrecy of the Council refuses us access to testimony.
They show, citing authority wherever it is possible, that
the Council was deprived of the freedom of originating
measures and of consultation and discussion upon those
measures which had been secretly prepared in advance,
and enforced upon the Council ; that in many ways un-
precedented in such bodies, the power of the poj:>e was
brought to bear, both upon the Council as a whole and
upon its individual members, so depriving it of the lib-
erty which, according to the traditions of the Roman-
catholic church, is essential to the authority of a gen-

Apohgia pro Vita Sua, frankly purged himself, personally, of com-
plicity with such morality. But this is not sufficient to protect his
fellow-ecclesiastics from the irresistible inference that what they
are required to accept as doctrine will be put in practice by tin im
when occasion demands.

* Published by Henri Hon, Paris, 1870. It is greatly to be re-
gretted that no translation of this work is extant in English.

f Kivingtons, London. Pott, Young & Co, , New York.

X Petri Privilegium : Three Pastoral Letters to the Clergy of the
Diocese, 1867-1871. By Henry Edward. Archbishop of Westmin-
ster. London: Longmans.

MATERIALS FOR ITS HISTORY. 9

eral council : and that at the same time, by processes
utterly foreign to the genius and antecedents of that
church, an outside pressure had been created by the
systematic arts of the Jesuits and other orders cen-
tering at Rome, the lower orders of clergy and the
laity having been stirred up to affect and control the
votes of the bishops set over them. Furthermore, the
statements of these books concur with each other and
with the common course of public report, in represent-
ing that within the council-chamber the course of the
majority towards the minority was in like manner domi-
neering and tyrannical, and that the attempt of certain
bold speakers of the minority to compel a hearing gave
rise to scenes of outrageous disorder and confusion ;
finally, that the result sought by the papal court and
the subservient majority was reached only by the sud-
den and peremptory shutting off of debate on the main
question.

Against these statements, made in the most circum-
stantial manner, by persons admitted by their oppo-
nents to have had access to the facts, the defence set
up is a sweeping negative and a general denunciation
of "all such things as have been uttered in the afore-
said newspapers and pamphlets, as altogether false and
calumnious, whether in contempt of our holy father
and of the apostolic see, or to the dishonor of this holy
synod, and on the score of its asserted want of legiti-
mate liberty."* Archbishop Manning declares, with
many bitter words concerning gainsay ers, that, "set-
ting aside this one question of opportuneness, there
was not in the Council of the Vatican a difference of
any gravity, and certainly no difference vlmtsoever on any

* Protest of the Council, signed by the cardinals president,
Petri Privilegium, 3. 34. 181.

1*

10 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

doctrine of faith." " Never was there a greater unanim-
ity than in the Vatican Council." " I have never seen
such calmness, self-respect, mutual forbearance, cour-
tesy, and self-control as in the eighty-nine sessions of
the Vatican Council." " Occasionally murmurs of dis-
sent were audible ; now and then a comment may have
been made aloud. In a very few instances, and those
happily of an exceptional kind, expressions of strong dis-
approval and of exhausted patience at length escaped.
But the descriptions of violence, outcries, menace, de-
nunciation, and even of personal collisions, with which
certain newspapers deceived the world, I can affirm to
be calumnious falsehoods, fabricated to bring the Coun-
cil into odium and contempt."*

* Petri Prtotoghan, 3. 26-28.

The writer proceeds to denounce as sheer, deliberate fabrica-
tion, the representation of the Council as a "scene of indecent
clamor and personal violence, unworthy even in laymen, criminal
in bishops of the church ;" and to deny "that a tyrannical major-
ity deprived the minority of liberty of discussion." These expres-
sions receive great light from the speech of Archbishop Kenrick in
this volume. The form of expression, " lean affirm" etc., is wor-
thy of notice, in view of the approved principle of Roman-catholic
morals thus stated by St. Alphonsus de Liguori: "If a man is
asked about something which it is his interest to conceal, he can
answer, No, I say : that is, / say the icord No. Cardenas doubts
about this ; but saving his better counsel, he seems to do so with-
out reason, for the word I say really has two senses ; it means to
utter and to assent. We here employ it in the sense of utter. " Theol.
Moralis, 4. 151. A full exhibit of the teaching of this approved
and authorized treatise of St. Alphonsus on this point may be
found in Meyrick's "Moral Theology of the Church of Rome,"
republished with an introduction by the Rev. A. C. Coxe, Balti-
more, 1856.

Archbishop Manning is believed by those who know him to be
a man whose natural generosity and dignity of character would
restrain him from such subterfuge. It is all the more important
to be assured of this, as it becomes manifest that the religious
teachings which he is required to accept do not so restrain him,

MATEKIALS FOR ITS HISTORY. 11

In view of these flat contradictions and mutual im-
peachments of veracity, it becomes most desirable, in
order to come at the true history of the Council, to find
some witness or document of decisive authority. The
shorthand reports of its transactions and debates (if
such speech-making as was permissible under the ex-
traordinary rules imposed upon the Council by the pope
may be called debate) are secreted in its archives, to
be — not quoted, but mysteriously alluded to as some-
thing that ivould be very decisive if it were allowed to
quote them.* The lips of the multitude of witnesses
are sealed with bonds of secrecy, which can be relaxed
only by the dispensing authority of the pope, and will
therefore be relaxed only in favor of the pope's own
party ; so that "the bishops of the minority are bound
to secrecy for all their lives, and the history will never
be written except by those whose passions have precip-
itated the issue." f

One document, however, of remarkable character
and unimpeachable authenticity, has providentially
escaped from the secrecy that has been wrapped around
most of the doings of the Council. It is from the pen
of the ablest of the American bishops — Archbishop
Kenrick of St. Louis. It was not intended to be seen
by the public, much less by the Protestant public ; but
was prepared, first, to be spoken in the secret assem-
bly ; and when that was prevented by the sudden and

but have, in fact, the contrary tendency. What can we believe
from men who, on the question in hand, stand confessed before
the public as being forbidden to tell the truth, under the most awful
sanctions, and as having a standing license to deceive the public
"for a good reason" — "and any honest object, such as keeping
our goods, spiritual or temporal, is a good reason. "
• * Petri Privilegium, 3. 32.

f Cfe <7"> sc passe an Concile, p. G2.

12 THE VATICAN COUNCIL,

unanticipated shutting off of debate, was printed, still
in the Latin language, for private circulation among
the bishops of the Council. Its testimony on the ques-
tions of fact now in dispute before the public is entirely
incidental, being in the form of allusions to facts of
which the persons to whom it was addressed had been
eye-and-ear witnesses. For this reason, its testimony
is all the more impressive — is, in fact, decisive. It is
possible to imagine one of the members of the Council,
at a distance, in time and space, from the events of
which he speaks, under the excitement of public dis-
cussion, under the inlluence of a most unhappy system
of perverted morality commended to him by "infalli-
ble" authority, in the presence of readers who have no
means of testing his statements, to make sweeping gen-
eral assertions not corresponding with the truth. But
it is not possible to imagine one of the members of the
Council laying in print, privately, under the eyes of his
colleagues, detailed statements or distinct and circum-
stantial allusions which they personally knew to be false.
What bearing, then, has this decisive document on
the questions of fact at issue between the bishops of
the majority as represented by Archbishop Manning,
and those of the minority as represented in the "Let-
ters of Quirinus," and in " Ce qui se passe an Concilet"
The question is one of so much moment to a large part
of the religious world, that the entire pamphlet of Arch-
bishop Kenrick is now for the first time laid before the
public, in this volume,* that every one may decide for

* We had translated this speech from the private edition print-
ed at Naples for circulation in the Council. But since this work
was commenced, a copy has reached us of the " Documenia ad
UJustrandum Concilium Vaticanum," published at Nordlingen bys
Professor Friedrich of Munich, which contains Kenrick's speech,

MATERIALS FOR ITS HISTORY. 13

himself. It is sufficient for the immediate purpose of
this Introduction to say that on all those points (and
they are many) of disputed fact between these parties,
on which it gives light, it discredits the declarations of
the archbishop of Westminster and the solemn protest
of the majority of the Council, and approves the sub-
stantial accuracy of the writings which they denounce
as mendacious.

This point being established, we may proceed with
more confidence in our brief history.

in Latin, together with other documents of the interior history of
the Council, which tend still further to confirm all the allegations
hitherto made of the oppression of the Council by the court of
Rome, and of its entire lack of that liberty which, according to
the traditions of the Roman-catholic church itself, is essential to
the authority of an (Ecumenical Council.

Only the first part of this important work is yet published.
It contains :

1. The pamphlet on infallibility distributed in the Council by
Bp. Ketteler, of Mayence, entitled Qucestio.

2. "La Liberti du Concile et V Infaillibiliti" by one of the high-
est ecclesiastics of France, printed about June 1, 1870, to the num-
ber of only 50 copies, for distribution to the Cardinals exclusively.

3. The Speech of Archbishop Kenrick.

4. Eight Protests by bishops of the minority, presented at dif-
ferent times in the Council.

5. The Order and Mode of proceedings in the Council of Trent.
G. Correspondence between Cardinals Schwarzenberg and An-

tonelli ; and the former's " Desideria patribus Concilii (Ecumenlci
proponenda. "

7. A Dissertation (in French) on a point of casuistry on which the
writer seeks relief, at the hands of the Council, from the common
rules imposed by Romish wri'ers of Moral Theology.

14 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTER II.
THE OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL.

By one of the leading spirits of the Council it has
been emphatically denied that "its one object was to
define the infallibility of the pope."* And justly ; for
the definition of infallibility was obviously not so much
an end, as the means to an end. What was the defi-
nite purpose in the minds of those who projected and
controlled the Council was for a long time concealed
from the knowledge of the public, and even of the
bishops of whom the Council was to be composed. The
Bull of Indiction of June 29, 18G8, dealt in the va
generalities of promised blessings to the church and
the world. It was not long before simultaneous opera-
tions in all quarters, directed from a common centre,
for the creation of a factitious public sentiment in favor
of the notion of the infallibility of the pope, confirmed
in the minds of that party in the church whose over-
throw was contemplated, their suspicions of the real
object of the convocation. Since the close of the
Council all disguise has been dropped, and the tri-
umphant majority acknowledges that the object all
along has been to crush the "Liberal Catholic" party
in the Roman-catholic church.")*

AVhat is, or was, the Liberal Catholic party? It

* Petri PrivUegium, 3. 34.

f See (out of many examples) the Catholic World for August,
1871, in an article on "Infallibility." It alleges as the present
reason for the definition of the new dogma that ' ' numbers of good
and loyal Catholics were beginning to go astray after a so-called
Catholic liberalism, and a clique of secret traitors was plotting a

OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL. 15

may be described as the fruit of that revival of religion
in the Eoman-catholic church of Europe, and espe-
cially of France, which followed the transient stupor in
which that church was left by the shock of the French
Revolution. It was led by certain men whose noble-
ness and purity of character, whose single-minded zeal
for truth and righteousness, and whose unfeigned affec-
tion towards the Roman-catholic church, (which, to
their minds, represented the kingdom of Christ upon
earth,) none but the most audacious partisans have
ever dared to question. Such a one, in statesmanship
and literature, was the late Count de Montalembert :
such, in the pulpit, were Lacordaire and Hyacinthe ;
and in the domain of theology, such was the foremost
scholar of the Roman church, the illustrious Dollinger.
The eulogists of Rome had no prouder names than
these to boast in all their prodigious roll.

What made these men liberals in the Catholic
church was their serious, earnest apprehension of the
fact — so painful, yet so prevalent throughout Roman-
catholic countries — of the alienation of the great mass
of thoughtful men from the only form of Christianity
which they know.* It seemed to them a fact of sad
and fearful significance, that all the interests of liberty
and social improvement should have been unnaturally

revolt against the holy see, disguised under the ambiguities and
reservations of Gallicanism, " p. 593. The significance of this
allegation cannot be fully appreciated without considering that
for several years the Catholic World had been diligently commend-
ing the men and the principles of the Liberal Catholic party to the
American public, as representing the real liberality of the Eoman-
catholic church, and its accordance with free government and
American sentiment.

* See the confession of Cardinal Schwarzenberg, in his ' ' Besi-
deria Patribus Concilii (Ecumemci proponenda," in Doc. ad Ulustr.
Gone. Vat, p. 285.

1G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

divorced from the gospel ; and that the church of
Christ should have come to be identified, by its minis-
ters and by the mass of the public, with abhorred sys-
tems of civil and religious despotism, with the obso
lete horrors of the Inquisition and the dragonnades,
and with Certain modern abuses and corruptions which
seemed to them to have no necessary connection with
the church upon which they had fastened themselves.
The voices of these eloquent and earnest men. as they
sounded forth from the press. i*r«»m the rostrum, and
from the historic pulpit of Notre Dame, while they
bore brave witness lor God and Christ and duty, were
affected with something of human and Christlike sym-
pathy with the ills and the aspirations of the society
in which they lived. "Their voiee was to the sons of

men." It seemed a strange thing to hear from under

the Dominican or Carmelite frock any word of gener-
ous sympathy towards those who were seeking, even in
a wandering and hopeless way, for liberty and
improvement— any assurance that Christianity and the
church were not necessarily committed to the side of
despotism and public ignorance, of religious persecu-
tion, the oppression of the conscience, the muzzling of
the press, the gagging of public speech. There was a
power in such utterances from the lips of Lacordaire
and Hyacinthe, which not even the matchless splendor
of their rhetoric could account for. The people who
had learned to regard the church and clergy as their
natural enemies, came in vast throngs about the pul-
pit of Notre Dame, eager to listen to a gospel which,
while it rebuked and refuted their errors, and had no
tolerance for their vices, nevertheless refused to ally
itself with the advocates of hereditary tyranny, or with
the apologists of obsolete cruelty.

OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL. 17

The three characteristic aims of the Liberal Catho-
lic party can hardly be better defined than in the terms
in which the illustrious Hyacinthe summed up the ten-
dencies of his own preaching :

1. The reconciliation of the Roman-catholic church
with modern society.

2. Not by compromise of convictions, but by points
of common belief and practice, and by the spirit of
charity, to draw together the various communions of
Christian believers ; emphasizing the doctrine of "the
soul of the church,"* which includes all holy and be-
lieving souls, as distinguished from the body or corpo-
ration of the church, which "holds many of the wolves
within its fold, and keeps many of the lambs with-
out, "f

3. To endeavor to bring back the Roman-catholic
church toward the spirit of its early days. J

These liberal sentiments were associated, neverthe-
less, not only with Christian faith, but with a most
hearty and loyal affection towards the Roman-catho-
lic church, its theology and government. The liberal
party was far removed from sympathy with that " Gal-
licanism " which would limit the authority of the
church, in its proper sphere, by the interference of any
political power whatever. That famous maxim of
Cavour, which is but the condensed expression of the
universal American sentiment, "A free church in a
free state," was an echo from the lips of Montalem-
bert.

And yet so ardent was the loyalty of this band of fer-
vid Catholics towards the see and the person of the

* St. Augustine. f Idem.

X Father Hyacinthe's Discourses, vol. 1, p. 37. Putnam Sc

Sons.

18 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

pope, that they braved the reproach of inconsistency
that they might maintain with tongue and pen and
sword that petty principality of the Roman state which
both in theory and in administration was the most abso-
lute contradiction to all their principles. It was due to
Montalembert and his associates that the temporal
power of the pope was restored to him by the arms of
France, after its overthrow in 1848 : it was due to the
same party that when later the same temporal power was
threatened with something more formidable than rev-
olution— with bankruptcy — the contribution of Peter's
pence was organized which stayed the doomed and tot-
tering throne a few brief seasons longer.

Notwithstanding the fervent devotion of the Liberal

Catholics to the Church of Rome, which they dncerery

held to be the embodiment <>t' the kingdom <>i' Christ
on the earth ; notwithstanding the fact that within their
slender number they embraced the most illustrious
names of contemporary Catholicism ; notwithstanding
the eminent services which they had rendered to the
pope and see of Rome ; it was impossible for their
principles of civil and religious liberty to be conspicu-
ously taught in a Roman-catholic country, without
drawing fort^i against them the outcries and the organiz-
ed opposition of the hierarchy and of the religious orders.
It is difficult for us in America to comprehend the
indignation which was roused, throughout the Roman-
catholic hierarchy, by the enunciation in a "Catholic
Congress," by a French nobleman, of doctrines of the
rights and dignity of conscience, of religious liberty,
of hatred to persecution and the Inquisition, which are
familiar to American citizens as axioms of universal ac-
ceptation. The words of Montalembert in an assembly
of Catholics at Malines were these :

OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL. 19

" Of all liberties which I have undertaken to defend,
the most precious in my view, the most sacred, the most
legitimate, the most necessary, is liberty of conscience.
.... I must confess that this enthusiastic devotion
of mine to religious liberty is not general among Cath-
olics. They are very fond of it for themselves — which
is no great merit. Generally speaking, everybody likes
every sort of liberty for himself. But religious liberty
for its own sake, the liberty of other men's consciences,
the liberty of that worship which men denounce and
repudiate — this is what disturbs and enrages many of

us Are we at liberty, now-a-days, to demand

liberty for the truth — that is, for ourselves (for every
honest man believes what he holds to be the truth) and
refuse it to error — that is, to persons who differ from us ?

I answer flatly, No I feel an invincible horror

at all punishments and all violences inflicted on man-
kind under pretence of serving or defending religion.
The fagots lighted by the hands of Catholics are as hor-
rible to me as the scaffolds on which Protestants have
immolated so many martyrs. The gag in the mouth of
any sincere preacher of his own faith, I feel as if it were
between my own lips, and it makes me shudder with
distress."*

In the United States it was possible for such senti-
ments from Roman-catholic presses or platforms to
pass without official rebuke, or even to stand unchal-
lenged, and be ostentatiously put forward as the accept-
ed doctrine of the Church of Rome. But in countries
where opinion was divided, where great political inter-

* The entire passage, which is full of genuine eloquence, is
quoted in De Pressense's article on Parties in the Catholic Church
in France, appended to volume I. of the Discourses of Father Hya-
ciuthc.

20 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

ests involved in the maintenance of th< doc-

trines of absolutism and persecution, were wont to count
on the undivided support of the Romish hierarchy, it
was not possible. The most that the Roman-catholic
friends of civil and religions liberty in Europe could
have hoped, for their opinions, was that they should be
tolerated. But even this hope was disappointed.41

* We have given above the position of the Liberal Catholic par-
Lefined by themselves, it is well to add their account
position of the opposite party, as briefly summed up in an article
in the Gorrespondant, a few years since, by the Prince de Broglie.

According to him the position of the ultramontane party is. "that
the Church is the declared enemy (1) of hnm . (2) of

modern soc'n ty. (3) of religious liberty, (I) of political liberty."

1. Enmity to Human Reason. " This enmity docs not display
itself merely by the tone of detraction and irony with which it
pursues all the efforts and acts of human reason, by its shouts of
triumph on every occasion when reason stumbles and goes wrong.

There are besides whole systems of philosophy connected, which
.stop short of nothing less than denying reason the faculty of investi-
gating even a shadow of truth without the aid of faith; and these arc
Bystems around which ultramontanism throws all its credit and affec-
tion. In a word, whenever these new champions of the church
of reason, one would say that they saw passing before their i
enemy whom they menace with every hostile look and gesture, and
upon whom they are ever ready to precipitate themselves headlong."

2. Enmity to Modem Society. — "The same doctrines which in-
culcate enmity to human reason, profess unmitigated hostility to
the constitution of modern society as based on that reason. No
one can therefore flatter himself that he can remain a member of
the spiritual communion of Christians, and of temporal sod

at present constituted in France, on the principles of 17S9; And
this hostility between modern society and the church, so eagerly
pointed out and insisted on by the infidel, the party we speak of
accepts without the smallest hesitation, in all its bearings, and fol-
lows out into all its applications. In its eyes, all modern society
comes excommunicated into the world — no baptism can wash away
the stain on its first origin. All is bad, anti-Christian, anti-Catho-
lic, in the principles of modern society."

3. Enmity to Religious Liberty. — "In all that infidelity has repeat-
ed on the subject, I do not remember ever to have met with any-

OBJECT OF THE COUNCIL. 21

The speeches of Montalembert at Malines were pro-
nounced in August, 1863. On the 8th of December,
1864, was issued from the Vatican the Encyclical Let-
ter entitled " Quanta Cura" to which was appended the
famous " Syllabus" of propositions condemned by Pope
Pius IX. in various pontifical documents. In its terms,
this edict applies to all liberal thought and opinion hi

thing so precisely and accurately laid down, as what we may now
read every day in the columns of the contemporary religious press.
It has cut short all debate by a summary process, and has declared
dogmatically civil intolerance to be an article of faith for every
Catholic, and religious liberty to be heresy. The church chastises
heretics by force, when she can — where she can — as much as she
can. If she tolerates them anywhere, it is as one tolerates a
necessary evil, with the intention only of freeing oneself from it on
the first opportunity ; but she never can accept religious liberty as
a principle of Christian duty. Intolerance is her right the mo-
ment it becomes possible. No lapse of time can raise prescription
against her — no promise bind her ; witness Louis XIV. and the
edict of Nantes. Such is the theory we may now see every day
professed by these religious controversialists. "

4. Enmity to Political Liberty. — "A stale calumny, which infi-
delity itself blushed for, and now only ventured to whisper, con-
sisted in representing the church as the natural ally of tyranny and

the born adversary of all public liberty The new style of

religious controversy of which we speak has resuscitated it, and in
our. day of storms and disaster, hastened voluntarily to proclaim a
solemn divorce between religion and national liberty Ultra-
montane controversy has excommunicated liberty from the tribu-
nal of religion herself, has preached absolute power as a dogma,
has equally proscribed every guarantee of individual and civil lib-
erty as the fruit of human pride, and abandoned every restriction
preservative of public right. "

Allowance may be made for this statement of the questions at
issue, as proceeding from one of the parties to the controversj7.
But the manifesto of the opposite party, in the "Encyclical and
Syllabus," substantially accepts this statement. The issue made
up between the two parties, to be tried in general council, was
whether those sentiments which are the universal sentiments of
American society and American Christianity are to be tolerated
within the pale of the Roman-catholic church.

22 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

all parts of the world. It condemns ull those convic-
tions concerning human rights and duties which under-
lie the best results of modern civilization, and which are
incorporated with all the habits of American thought
and the fabric of American government. But the time
of its issue; and the forms of expression used in it made
it clear to men of every party that it was aimed at the
Liberal party in the Catholic church. •

It was unfortunate that a document in which the
American people have so practical an interest should
have been published at a time when all our minds were
absorbed in the pending question of our national exist-
ence. If it had been issued in a time of peace and
quiet, its astounding enunciations would have produced
a wholesome shock upon the public mind. But amid
the excitements of that critical period, it slipped into
its place among the documents of past history, with so
little attention from the community that it is important
for us to reproduce it here.

ENCYCLICAL "QUANTA CUR A," AND SYLLABUS.

To Our Venerable Brethren, the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops,
and Bishops of the Universal Church having Grace and Com-
munion of the Apostolic See,

PIUS PP. IX.

HEALTH AND APOSTOLIC BENEDICTION.

It is well known unto all men, and especially to you,
venerable brethren, with what great care and pastoral
vigilance our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs, have
discharged the office intrusted by Christ our Lord to
them in the person of the most blessed Peter, prince of
the apostles, and have unremittingly discharged the
duty of feeding the lambs and sheep, and have dili-
gently nourished the Lord's entire flock with the words

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 23

of faith, imbued it with salutary doctrine, and guarded
it from poisoned pastures. And those, our predeces-
sors, who were the assertors and champions of the
august Catholic religion, truth and justice, being as they
were chiefly solicitous for the salvation of souls, held
nothing to be of so great importance as the duty of
exposing and condemning, in their most wise letters and
constitutions, all heresies and errors which are hostile
to moral honesty and to the eternal salvation of man-
kind, and which have frequently stirred up terrible com-
motions and have damaged both the Christian and civil
commonwealths in a disastrous manner. "Wherefore
those our predecessors have, with apostolic fortitude,
continually resisted the nefarious attempts of unjust
men, who, like raging waves of the sea foaming forth
their own confusion and promising liberty whilst they
are the slaves of corruption, endeavored by their false
opinions and most pernicious writings to overthrow
the foundations of the Catholic religion and of civil
society, to abolish all virtue and justice, to deprave
the souls and minds of all men, and especially to per-
vert inexperienced youth from uprightness of morals, to
corrupt them miserably, to lead them into snares of
error, and finally to tear them from the bosom of the
Catholic church.

And now, venerable brethren, as is also very well
known to you — scarcely had we (by the secret dispensa-
tion of Divine Providence, certainly by no merit of our
own) been called to this chair of Peter, when we, to the
extreme grief of our soul, beheld a horrible tempest
stirred up by so many erroneous opinions, and the
dreadful, and never-enough-to-be-lamented mischiefs
which redound to Christian people from such errors :
and we then, in discharge of our apostolic ministerial

24 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

office, imitating the example of our illustrious prede-
cessors, raised our voice, and in several published encyc-
lical letters, and in allocutions delivered in cons:
and in other apostolical ndemned the prom-

inent, most grievOUfl errors of the age, and avc stirred
ii]> your excellent episcopal vigilance, and again and
again did we admonish and exhort all the sons of the
Catholic church, who are most dear to us, that they
should abhor and shun all the said errors as they would
the contagion of a fatal pestilence. Especially in our
first encyclical letter, written to you on the !»th of No-
vember, anno 1846, and in two allocutions, one of which
was delivered by us in consistory on the 9th of 1>>
her, anno 186 I. and the other on the 9th of June, anno

1862, we condemned the monstrous and portentous opin-
ions which prevail especially in the present age to the

very great loss of souls, and even to the detriment of civil
society ; and which are in the highest degree hostile,
not only to the Catholic church and to her salutary doc-
trine and venerable laws, bat also to the everlasting lawr
of nature engraven by (xod upon the hearts of all men,
and to right reason ; and out of which almost all other
errors originate.

Now although hitherto we have not omitted to de-
nounce and reprove the chief errors of this kind, yet
the cause of the Catholic church and the salvation of
souls committed to us by God, and even the interests
of human society, absolutely demand, that once again
we should stir up your pastoral solicitude to drive away
other erroneous opinions which flowr from those errors
above specified, as their source. These false and per-
verse opinions are so much the more detestable by how
much they have chiefly for their object to hinder and
banish that salutary influence which the Catholic church,

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 25

by the institution and command of her Divine Author,
ought freely to exercise, even to the consummation of the
world, oyer not only individual men but nations, peo-
ples, and sovereigns — and to abolish that mutual coop-
eration and agreement of counsels between the priest-
hood and governments which has always been propi-
tious and conducive to the welfare both of church and
state. (Gregory XVI. Encyclical, 13th August, 1832.)
You are well aware that at this time, there are not a
few who apply to civil society the impious and absurd
principle of naturalism, as they term it, and dare to teach
that " the welfare of the state and political and social
progress require that human society should be consti-
tuted and governed irrespective of religion, which is to
be treated just as if it did not exist, or as if no real dif-
ference existed between true and false religions." Con-
trary to the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, of the
church, and of the holy fathers, these persons do not
hesitate to assert that " the best condition of human
society is that wherein no duty is recognized by the
government of correcting by enacted penalties the vio-
lators of the Catholic religion, except when the main-
tenance of the public peace requires it." From this
totally false notion of social government, they fear not
to uphold that erroneous opinion most pernicious to
the Catholic church and to the salvation of souls, which
was called by our predecessor Gregory XVI, above
quoted, the insanity, (Encycl., 13th August, 1832,) (deli-
ramentum,) namely, that "liberty of conscience and of
worship is the right of every man ; and that this right
ought, in every well-governed state, to be proclaimed
and asserted by the law ; and that the citizens possess
the right of being unrestrained in the exercise of every
kind of liberty, by any law, ecclesiastical or civil, so that

V.iti.Hii Council. ._

26 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

they are authorized to publish and put forward openly,
all their ideas whatsoever, either by speaking, in print,
or by any other method." But whilst these men make
these rash assertions, they do not reflect or consider
that they preach the liberty of perdition, (St. Augustine,
Epistle 10.*), al. 1G(>,) and that, "if it is always five to
human arguments to discuss, men will never be want-
ing who will dare to resist the truth, and to rely upon
the loquacity of human wisdom, when we know from
the command of our Lord Jesus Christ how faith and
Christian wisdom ought to avoid this most mischievous
vanity." (St. Leo, Epistle 164, al. 133, sec. 2, Boll ed. |
And since religion has been banished from civil gov-
ernment; since the teaching and authority of divine
revelation have been repudiated, the idea inseparable
therefrom of justice and human right is obscured by
darkness and lost, and in place of true justice and legit-
imate right material force is substituted, whence it ap-
pears why some, entirely neglecting and slighting the
most certain principles of sound reason, dare to pro-
claim "that the will of the people, manifested by pub-
lic opinion, (as they call it,) or by other means, consti-
tutes a supreme law independent of all divine and
human right ; and that, in the political order, accom-
plished facts, by the mere met of their having been
accomplished, have the force of right." But who does
not plainly see and understand that human society,
released from the ties of religion and true justice, can
have no other purpose than to compass its own ends,
and to amass riches, and can follow no other law in its
actions than the indomitable wickedness of a heart given
up to the service of its selfish pleasures and interests ?
For this reason also these same men persecute with such
bitter hatred the religious Orders who have deserved so

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 27

well of religion, civil society, and letters ; they loudly
declare that the Orders have no right to exist, and, in
so doing, make common cause with the falsehoods of
the heretics. For, as was most wisely taught by our
predecessor of illustrious memory, Pius VI., "the abo-
lition of religious Orders injures the state of public pro-
fession of the evangelical counsels; injures a mode of life
recommended by the church as in conformity with apos-
tolical doctrine ; does wrong to the illustrious founders
whom we venerate upon our altars, and who constituted
these societies under the inspiration of God." (Epistle
to Cardinal de la Kochefoucauld, March 10, 1791.)

And these same persons also impiously pretend that
citizens should be deprived of the liberty of publicly
bestowing on the church their alms for the sake of
Christian charity, and that the law forbidding "ser-
vile labor on account of divine worship " upon certain
fixed days should be abolished upon the most fallacious
pretext that such liberty and such law are contrary to
the principles of political economy. Not content with
abolishing religion in public society, they desire further
to banish it from families and private life. Teaching
and professing those most fatal errors of socialism and
communism, they declare that " domestic society or the
family derives all its reason of existence solely from civil
law, whence it is to be concluded that from civil law de-
scend and depend all the rights of parents over their
children, and, above all, the right of instructing and
educating them. " By such impious opinions and machi-
nations do these most false teachers endeavor to elimi-
nate the salutary teaching and influence of the Catholic
church from the instruction and education of youth,
and to miserably infect and deprave by every pernicious
error and vice the tender and pliant minds of youth.

28 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

All those who endeavor to throw into confusion both
religious and political affairs. to destroy the good order
of society, and to annihilate all divine and human rights,
have always exerted all their criminal schemes, atten-
tion, and efforts apon the manner in which they might,
above all. deprave and delude unthinking youth, as we

have already shown : it is upon the corruption of youth
that they place all their hopes. Thus they never cease

to attack by every method the clergy, both secular and
regular, from whom, as testify to us in so conspicuous

a manner the mosl certain records of history, such con-
siderable benefits have been bestowed in abundance

upon Christian and civil society and upon the republic

of Letters ; asserting of the clergy in general, that they

are the enemies of the useful sciences, of progress, and

of civilization, and that they ought to be deprived of
all participation in the work of teaching and training
the young.

Others, reviving the depraving fictions of innova-
tors, errors many times condemned, presume with ex-
traordinary impudence, to subordinate the authority of
the church and of this apostolic see, conferred upon it
by Christ our Lord, to the judgment of civil authority,
and to deny all the rights of this same church and this
see with regard to those things which appertain to the
secular order. For these persons do not blush to affirm
" that the laws of the church do not bind the conscience
if they are not promulgated by the civil power ; that
the acts and decrees of the Roman pontiffs concerning
religion and the church require the sanction and appro-
bation, or at least the assent, of the civil power ; and
that the apostolic constitutions (Clement XII., Bene-
dict XXV., Pius VII., Leo XII.) condemning secret so-
cieties, whether these exact or do not exact an oath of

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 29

secrecy, and branding with anathema their followers and
partisans, have no force in those countries of the world
where such associations are tolerated by the civil gov-
ernment." It is likewise affirmed " that the excommu-
nications launched by the council of Trent and the Ro-
man pontiffs against those who invade and usurp the
possessions of the church and its rights, strive, by con-
founding the spiritual and temporal orders to attain
solely a mere earthly end ; that the church can decide
nothing which may bind the consciences of the faithful
in the temporal order of things ; that the right of the
church is not competent to restrain with temporal pen-
alties the violators of her laws ; and that it is in accord-
ance with the principles of theology and of public law
for the civil government to appropriate property pos-
sessed by the churches, the religious orders, and other
pious establishments." And they have no shame in
avowing openly and publicly the heretical statement
and principle from which have emanated so many errors
and perverse opinions, "that the ecclesiastical power is
not by the law of God made distinct from and indepen-
dent of civil power, and that no distinction, no inde-
pendence of this kind can be maintained without the
church invading and usurping the essential rights of the
civil power." Neither can we pass over in silence the
audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine,
assert that "the judgments and decrees of the holy
see, the object of which is declared to concern the gen-
eral welfare of the church, its rights, and its discipline ;
do not cla;m acquiescence and obedience under pain of
sin and loss of the Catholic profession, if they do not
treat of the dogmas of faith and of morals."

How contrary is this doctrine to the Catholic dogma
of the plenary power divinely conferred on the sover-

30 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

eign pontiff by our Lord Jesus Christ, to guide to super-
vise, and govern the universal church, no one can fail to
sec and understand clearly and evidently.

Amid so great a perversity of depraved opinions,
remembering our apostolic duty, and solicitous before
all things for our most holy religion, for sound doctrine,
for the saltation of the souls confided to us, and for the
welfare of human society itself, hare considered the
moment opportune to raise anew our apostolic voice.
Therefore do we by our apostolic authority reprobate,
denounce, and condemn generally and particularly all
the evil opinions and doctrines specially mentioned in

this letter, and we wish that they may he held as rep-
robated, denounced, and condemned by all the children
of the Catholic church.

But you know further, venerable brethren, that in
our time the haters of all truth ami justice and violent

enemies of our religion have spread abroad other impi-
ous doctrines by means of pestilent books, pamphlets,
and journals, which, distributed over the surface of the
earth, deceive the people and wickedly lie. You are
not ignorant that in our day men are found who, ani-
mated and excited by the spirit of Satan, have arrived
at that excess of impiety as not to fear to deny our Lord
and Master Jesus Christ, and to attack his divinity with
scandalous persistence. And here we cannot abstain
from awarding you well-merited praise, venerable breth-
ren, for all the care and zeal with which you have raised
your episcopal voice against so great an impiety.

And therefore in this present letter, we speak to you
with all affection ; to you who, called to partake our
cares, are our greatest support in the midst of our very
great grief, our joy and our consolation, by reason of
the excellent piety of wThich you give 'proof in main-

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 31

taining religion, and the marvellous love, faith, and dis-
cipline with which, united by the strongest and most
affectionate ties to us and this apostolic see, you strive
valiantly and accurately to fulfil your most weighty epis-
copal ministry. We do then expect from your excellent
pastoral zeal that, taking the sword of the Spirit, which
is the word of God, and strengthened by the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ, you will watch with redoubled
care, that the faithful committed to your charge " ab-
stain from evil pasturage, which Jesus Christ doth not
till, because his father hath not planted it." (St. Ignat.
M. ad Philadelph. St. Leo, Epist. 156, al. 125.) Never
cease, then, to inculcate on the faithful that all true hap-
piness for mankind proceeds from our august religion,
from its doctrines and practice, and that that people is
happy who have the Lord for their God. (Psalm 143.)
Teach them " that kingdoms rest upon the foundation
of the Catholic faith, (St. Celest. Epist. 22, ad. Syn.
Eph.,) and that nothing is so deadly, nothing so certain
to engender every ill, nothing so exposed to danger, as
for men to believe that they stand in need of nothing
else than the free will which we received at birth, if we
ask nothing further from the Lord — that is to say, if
forgetting our Author, we abjure his power to show that
we are free." And do not omit to teach " that the royal
power has been established not only to exercise the gov-
ernment of the world, but, above all, for the protection
of the church, (St. Leo, Epist., 156 al. 125,) and that
there is nothing more profitable and more glorious for
the sovereigns of states and kings than to leave the
Catholic church to exercise its laws, and not to permit
any to curtail its liberty ;" as our most wise and coura-
geous predecessor, St. Felix, wrote to the Emperor Zeno.
"It is certain that it is advantageous for sovereigns,

\Y1 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

when the cause of God is in question, to submit their
royal will according to his ordinance, to the priests of
Jesus Christ, and not to prefer it before them." (Pius
VII. Epist. Encycl., Diu satis, 15th May, 1800.)

And if always, so, especially at present, is it our
duty, venerable brethren, in the midst of the numerous
calamities of the church and of civil society, iii view
of the terrible conspiracy of our adversaries against

the Catholic church and this apostolic see, and the great
accumulation of errors, it is before all things necessary
to go with faith to the Throne of < trace to obtain mer-
cy and find grace in timely aid. We have therefore
judged it right to excite the piety of all the faithful in
order that, with us and with you all, they may pray

without ceasing to the Father <>f lights and of mercies,

supplicating and beseeching him fervently and humbly ;

in order also that in the plenitude of their faith they may
seek refuge in our Lord JeSus Christ who has redeemed
us to God with his blood, that by their earnest and con-
tinual prayers they may obtain from that most dear
heart, victim of burning charity for us, that it would
draw all by the bonds of his love, and that all men
being inflamed by his holy love may live according to
his heart, pleasing God in all thing's and being fruitful
in all good works.

But, as there is no doubt that the prayers most
agreeable to God are those of the men who approach
him with a heart pure from all stain, we have thought
it good to open to Christians, with apostolic liberality,
the heavenly treasures of the church confided to our dis-
pensation, so that the faithful, more strongly drawn tow-
ards true piety and purified from the stain of their sins
by the sacrament of penance, may more confidently offer
up their prayers to God and obtain his mercy and grace.

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 33

By these letters emanating from our apostolic author-
ity, we grant to all and each of the faithful of both
sexes throughout the Catholic world, a plenary indul-
gence in the manner of a jubilee, during one month,
up to the end of the coming year 1865, and not longer,
to be carried into effect by you, venerable brethren, and
the other legitimate local ordinaries, in the form and
manner laid down at the commencement of our sover-
eign pontificate by our apostolical letters, in form of a
brief, dated the 20th of November, anno 1846, and sent
to the whole episcopate of the world, commencing with
the words, " Arcano divincB providential concilio," and
with the faculties given by us in those same letters. We
desire, however, that all the prescriptions of our letters
shall be observed, saving the exceptions we have de-
clared are to be made. And we have granted this, not-
withstanding all which might make to the contrary, even
those worthy of special and individual mention and
derogation ; and in order that every doubt and diffi-
culty may be removed, we have ordered that copies of
those letters should be again forwarded to you.

"Let us implore, venerable brethren, from our in-
most hearts, and with all our souls, the mercy of God.
He has encouraged us so to do, by sa3'ing : ' I will not
withdraw my mercy from them.' Let us ask and we
shall receive ; and if there is slowness or delay in its
reception, because we have grievously offended, let us
knock, because to him that knocketh it shall be opened —
if our prayers, groans, and tears, in which we must per-
sist and be obstinate, knock at the door— and if our
pra}Ter be united. Let each one pray to God, not for
himself alone, but for all his brethren, as the Lord hath
taught us to pray." (St. C}Tprian, Epistle 11.) But,
in order that God may accede more casilv to our and

34 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

your prayers, and to those of all his faithful servants,
let us employ in all confidence as our mediatrix with
him, the Virgin Mary, mother of God, who " has de-
stroyed all heresies throughout the world, and who,
the most loving mother of us all, is very gracious ....
and full of mercy .... allows herself to be entreated
by all, shows herself most clement towards all, and
takes under her pitying care all our necessities with a
most ample affection," (St. Bernard, Serm. de duodeoim
prerofjafiri.< />. M. V., ex verbis Apocalyp. ;) and who, " sit-
ting as queen upon the right hand of her only begotten
son our Lord Jesus Christ in a golden vestment clothed
around with various adornments." there is nothing which
she cannot obtain from him. Let us implore also the
intervention of the blessed Peter, chief of the apostles,
and of his co-apostle Paul, and of all those saints of
heaven, who, having already become the friends of
God, have been admitted into the celestial kingdom,
where they are crowned and bear palms, and who hence-
forth certain of their own immortality, are solicitous for
our salvation.

In conclusion, we ask of God from our inmost soul
the abundance of all his celestial benefits for you, and
wre bestow upon you, venerable brethren, and upon all
faithful clergy and laity committed to your care, our
apostolic benediction from the most loving depths of
our heart, in token of our charity towards you.

PIUS PP. IX.
Given at Kome from St. Peter's, this 8th of December, 1864,
1 the tenth. anniversary of the Dogmatic Definition of the
Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, Mother of
God, in the nineteenth year of our Pontificate.

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 35

The Syllabus of the principal errors of our time, which are stig-
matized in the Consistorial Allocutions, Encyclicals, and other
Apostolical Letters of our Most Holy Father, Pope Pius IX.

I. PANTHEISM, NATURALISM, AND ABSOLUTE RATIONALISM.

1. There exists no divine power, supreme being,
wisdom, and providence distinct from the universe, and
God is none other than nature, and is therefore muta-
ble. In effect, God is produced in man and in the
world, and all things are God, and have the very sub-
stance of God. God is therefore one and the same
thing with the world, and thence spirit is the same
thing with matter, necessity with liberty, true with
false, good with evil, justice with injustice. (Allocution
Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

2. All action of God upon man and the world is to
be denied. (Allocution Maxima q u idem, 9th June, 1862. )

3. Human reason, without airy regard to God, is the
sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, of good and evil ;
it is its own law to itself, and suffices by its natural force
to secure the welfare of men and of nations. (Allocu-
tion Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

4. All the truths of religion are derived from the
native strength of human reason ; whence reason is the
master rule by which man can and ought to arrive at
the knowledge of all truths of every kind. (Encyclical
Letters, Qui pluribus, 9th November, 1846 ; Singulari
quidem, 17th March, 1856 ; and the Allocution Maxima
quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

5. Divine revelation is imperfect, and, therefore,
subject to a continual and indefinite progress, which
corresponds with the progress of human reason. (En-
cyclical Qui pluribus, 9th November, 1846, and the Al-
locution Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

6. Christian faith is in opposition to human reason,

86 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and divine revelation not only docs not benefit, but even
injures the perfection of man. (Encyclical Qui plwri-
buB, Oth November, 1840, and the Allocution Maxima
quidem, 9th June, 18G2.)

7. The prophecies and miracles, uttered and narra-
ted in the Sacred Scriptures, are the fictions of poets ;
and the mysteries of the Christian faith arc the result of
philosophical invest Igations. In the books of the two
Testaments there are contained mythical inventions,
and Jesus Christ is himself a mythical tiction. (Encyc-
lical Qui 2>hn-ih>/s, Oth November, 1846, and the Allo-
cution Maxima quidem, 0th June, 1862.)

II. MODERATE nation aj.ism.

8. As human reason is placed on a level with reli-
gion, so theological matters must be treated in the same
manner as philosophical ones. (Allocution Sing atari
qufidam perfusi, Oth December, 1854.)

0. All the dogmas of the Christian religion are, with-
out exception, the object of natural science or philoso-
phy, and human reason, instructed solely by history, is
able, by its own natural strength and principles, to ar-
rive at the true knowledge of even the most abstruse
dogmas : provided such dogmas be proposed as subject
matter for human reason. (Letter ad Archiep. Frising.
Gravissimas, 11th December, 18G2 — to the same, Tuas
libenter, 21st December, 1863.)

10. As the philosopher is one thing, and philosophy
is another, so it is the right and duty of the philosopher
to submit himself to the authority which he shall have
recognized as true ; but philosophy neither can nor
ought to submit to any authority. (Letter ad Archiep.
Frising. Gravissimas, 11th December, 1862 — to the
same, Tuas libenter, 21st December, 1863.)

11. The church not onlv ought never to animadvert

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 37

upon philosophy, but ought to tolerate the errors of
philosophy, leaving to philosophy the care of their cor-
rection. (Letter ad Archiep. Frising. 11th Decem-
ber, 1862.)

12. The decrees of the apostolic see and of the Ro-
man congregation fetter the free progress of science.
(Id. Ibid.)

13. The method and principles by which the old
scholastic doctors cultivated theology, are no longer
suitable to the demands of the age and the progress of
science. (Id. Tuas libenter, 21st December, 1863.)

14. Philosophy must be treated of without any ac-
count being taken of supernatural revelation. (Id. Ibid. )

N. B. To the rationalistic system belong, in great
part, the errors of Anthony Gunther, condemned in
the letter to the cardinal archbishop of Cologne, Ex-
wniam (nam, June 15, 1857 ; and in that to the bishop
of Breslau, Dolore hand mediocri, April 30, 1860.

III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITFDIXARIANISM.

15. Every man is free to embrace and profess the
religion he shall believe true, guided by the light of rea-
son. (Apostolic Letters, Multiplices inter, 10th June,
1851 ; Allocution Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

16. Men may in any religion find the way of eternal
salvation, and obtain eternal salvation. (Encyclical Let-
ter, Qui pluribus, 9th November, 1846 ; Allocution,
Ubi primum, 17th December, 1847 ; Encyclical Letter,
Singidari quidem, 17th March, 1856.)

17. We may entertain at least a well-founded hope
for the eternal salvation of all those who are in no man-
ner in the true church of Christ. (Allocution Singulari
quadam, 9th December, 1854 ; Encyclical letter, Quanta
confieiamur, 10th August, 1863.)

c8 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

18. Protestantism is nothing more than another
form of the same true Christian religion, in which it is
possible to be equally pleasing to God as in the Catho-
lic church. (Encyclical letter, Noscitis et rwbiacum, 8th
December, 1849.)

IV. socialism, cummin ism, BBCBSX sociktils, l;li;i.ic\l. -
HIS, CLERICO-LIBERAL SOCIETIES.

Pests of this description are frequently rebuked in
the severest terms in the Encye. Qui pluribus, Nov. 9,
1846 ; Alloc. Quibus quantisque, April 20, 1849 ; Encyc
NosciHa <1 Nobi8Cum} Dec. 8, 1849 ; Alloc. Singulori qvA-
dam, Dec. 9, 1S54 ; Encyc. Quanto confidamut^ mcerore,
Aug. 10, 1868.

V. ERRORS CONCKKMNO THE CHUBCH AND HEB KK.liTs.

19. The church is not a true, and perfect, and en-
tirely free society, nor docs she enjoy peculiar and per-
petual rights conferred upon her by her Divine Founder,
but it appertains to the civil power to define what are
the rights and limits with which the church may exer-
cise authority. (Allocution Singulari quadam, 9th De-
cember, 1854 ; MuUisgravibusque, 17th December, 18G0;
Maxima <jUt<l<'m, 9th June, 1802.)

20. The ecclesiastical power must not exercise its
authority without the permission and assent of the civil
government. (Allocution, Memimi unusquisque, 30th
September, 1861.)

21. The church has not the power of denning dog-
matically that the religion of the Catholic church is
the only true religion. (Apostolic Letter, Multiplices
infer, 10th June, 1851.)

22. The obligation which binds Catholic teachers
and authors applies only to those things which are pro-
posed for universal belief as dogmas of the faith, by

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 39

the infallible judgment of the church. (Letter ad
Arehiep. Frising. Tuas libenter, 21st Dec, 1863.)

23. The Roman pontiffs and oecumenical councils
have exceeded the limits of their power, have usurped
the rights of princes, and have even committed errors
in denning matters of faith and morals. (Apost. Let-
ter, Multipliers inter, 10th June, 1851.)

24. The church has not the power of availing her-
self of force, or any direct or indirect temporal power.
(Letter Apost. Ad Ajwstoliece, 22d Aug., 1851. )

25. In addition to the authority inherent in the
episcopate, a further and temporal power is granted to
it by the civil authority, either expressly or tacitly,
which power is on that account also revocable by the
civil authority whenever it pleases. (Letter Apost. Ad
Apostdica, 22d Aug., 1851.)

26. The church has not the innate and legitimate
right of acquisition and possession. (Allocution Nun-
quamfore, 15th Dec, 1856. Encyclical Inrredibili, 17th
Sept., 1863.)

27. The ministers of the church and the Roman
pontiff ought to be absolutely excluded from all charge
and dominion over temporal affairs. (Allocution Max-
ima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

28. Bishops have not the right of promulgating
even their apostolical letters, without the permission of
the government. (Allocution Nunqvam fore, 15th De-
cember, 1856.)

29. Dispensations granted by the Roman pontiff
must be considered null, unless they have been asked
for by the civil government. (Id. Ibid.)

30. The immunity of the church and of ecclesiasti-
cal persons derives its origin from civil law. (Apost.
M\tl#plices inter, 10th June, 1851.)

40 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

31. Ecclesiastical courts for temporal causes, oi
the clergy, whether civil or criminal, ought by all c

to be abolished, even without the concurrence and
against the protest of the holy see. (Allocution Acer-
Ummum, 27th September, L862 ; Alloc. Nunquam fore,
15th December, 1866.)

32. The personal immunity exonerating the clergy
from military service may be abolished, without viola-
tion either of natural right or of equity. Its aboli-
tion is called for by civil progress, especially in a com-
munity constituted upon principles of liberal govern-
ment. (Letter to the archbishop of Montreal, Singula-
v/'s habisque, 29th September, 1864.)

33. It does not appertain exclusively to ecclesiasti-
cal jurisdiction, by any right; proper and inherent, to
direct the teaching of theological subjects. (Lett
Archiep. Frtiing. TuazJfSbenter, 21st December, 1863.)

34 The teaching of those, who compare the »
eigU pontiff to a free sovereign acting in the universal
church, is a doctrine which prevailed in the middle
ages. (letter Apost. Ad ApostQliocB, 22d August, 1851. ">

35. There would be no obstacle to the sentence of
a general council, or the act of all the universal peoples,
transferring the pontifical sovereignty from the bishop
and city of Rome to some other bisho}:>ric and some
other city. (Id. Ibid. )

36. The definition of a national council does not
admit of any subsequent discussion, and the civil power
can regard as settled an affair decided by such national
council. (Id. Ibid.)

37. National churches can be established, after be-
ing withdrawn and plainly separated from the authority
of the Roman pontiff. (Alloc. Multis gravibusque, 17th
Pec., 186*0 ; Jamdudum cernimw, 18th March, 1861.)

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 41

38. Roman pontiffs have, by their too arbitrary con-
duct, contributed to the division of the church into
eastern and western. (Letter Apost. Ad Apostoliece,
22d August, 1851.)

VI. ERRORS ABOUT CIVIL SOCIETY, CONSIDERED BOTH IN ITSELF
AND IN ITS RELATION TO THE CHURCH.

39. The republic is the origin and source of all rights,
and possesses rights which are not circumscribed by
any limits. (Allocution Maxima quidem, 9th June,
1862.)

40. The teaching of the Catholic church is o}:>posed
to the well-being and interests of society. (Encyclical
Qui pluribus, 9th November, 184G ; Allocution Quibus
qnantisque, 20th April, 1849.)

41. The civil power, even when exercised by an in-
fidel sovereign, possesses an indirect and negative power
over religious affairs. It therefore possesses not only
the right called that of exequatur, but that of the (so-
called) appeUatio ab abusu* (Apostolic Letter, Ad
Apostoliece, 22d August, 1801.)

42. In the case of conflicting laws between the two
powers, the civil law ought to prevail. (Letter Apost.
Ad Apostoliece, 22d August, 1851.)

43. The civil power has a right to break, and to de-
clare and render null the conventions (commonly called
concordats) concluded with the apostolic see, relative
to the use of rights appertaining to the ecclesiastical
immunity, without the consent of the holy see, and even
contrary to its protest. (Allocution In consisloriali, 1st
November, 1850. Mutt is r/raeibuxque, 17th December,
1860.

* The power of authorizing official acts of the papal power,
and of correcting the alleged abuses of the same,

42 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

44. The civil authority may interfere in matters re-
lating to religion, morality, and spiritual government
Hence it has control over the instructions for the guid-
ance of consciences issued, conformably with their mis-
sion, by the pastors of the church. Further, it pos-
sesses power to decree, in the matter of administering
the divine sacraments, as to the dispositions necessary

for their reception. (Allocution /// oonsUforiali, 1st

November, 1850 ; Allocution Maxima quidem^ 9th June,
1862.)

45. The entire direction of public schools, in which
the youth of Christian states are educated, except (to
a certain extent) in the case of episcopal seminaries,
may and must appertain to the civil power, and belong
to it so far, that no other authority whatsoever shall be
recognized as having any right to interfere in the disci-
pline of the schools, the arrangement of the studies, the
taking of degrees, or the choice and approval of the
teachers. (Allocution In consisioriali, 1st Nov., I860 ;
Allocution Quibus lucttumssimis, 5th Sept., 1851.)

4G. Much more, even in clerical seminaries, the
method of study to be adopted is subject to the civil
authority. (Allocution Nunquamfore, 15th December,
185(5.)

47. The best theory of civil society requires, that
popular schools open to the children of all classes, and
generally, all public institutes intended for instruction
in letters and philosophy, and for conducting the edu-
cation of the young, should be freed from all ecclesias-
tical authority, government, and interference, and
should be fulry subject to the civil and political power,
in conformity with the will of rulers and the prevalent
opinions of the age. (Letter to the archbishop of Fri-
bourg. Quum non sine, 14th July, 1864.)

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 43

48. This system of instructing youth, which consists
in separating it from the Catholic faith and from
the power of the church, and in teaching exclusively,
or at least primarily, the knowledge of natural things
and the earthly ends of social life alone, may be approv-
ed by Catholics. (Id. Ibid.)

49. The civil power has the right to prevent minis-
ters of religion, and the faithful, from communicating
freely and mutually with each other, and with the Roman
pontiff. (Allocution Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862.)

50. The secular authority possesses, as inherent in
itself, the right of presenting bishops, and may require
of them that they take possession of their dioceses, be-
fore having received canonical institution and the apos-
tolic letters from the holy see. (Allocution Nunquam

fore, 15th December, 1856.)

51. And further, the secular government has the
right of deposing bishops from their pastoral functions,
and it is not bound to obey the Roman pontiff in those
things which relate to episcopal sees and the institu-
tion of bishops. (Letter Apost. MuttipHqea inter, 10th
June, 1851 ; Allocution Acerbissimum, 27th Sept., 1852.)

52. The government has of itself the right to alter
the age prescribed by the church for the religious pro-
fession, both of men and women ; and it may enjoin
upon all religious establishments to admit no person to
take solemn vows without its permission. (Allocution
Nunquam fore, 15th Dec, 1856.)

53. The laws for the protection of religious estab-
lishments, and securing their rights and duties, ought
to be abolished : nay more, the civil government may
lend its assistance to all who desire to quit the religious
life they have undertaken, and break their vows. The
government may also suppress religious orders, colle-

44 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

giate churches, and simple benefices, even those belong-
ing to private patronage, and submit their goods and
revenues to the administration and disposal of the civil

power. (Allocution Acerbissimum, 27th Sept, 1852;
Allocution Probe memineritis, 22d January, is.").") ; Allo-
cution Cum scBpe, 26th July, 1855.)

54. Kings and princes are not only exempt from the

jurisdiction of the church, but are superior to the
church, in litigated questions of jurisdiction. (Letter
Apost. Multiplier inter, 10th June, 1851.)

55. The church ought to be separated from the state,

and the state from the church. (Allocution Acerbtigi-

mum, 27th September, 1S52.)

VII. ERBOBS I i CHBIgTIAN ETHICS.

.")«".. Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine
sanction, and there is no necessity that human laws
should be conformable to the law of nature, and receive
their sanction from God. (Allocution M lidem,

9th June, 1802.)

57. Knowledge of philosophical things and morals,
and also civil laws, may and must be independent of
divine and ecclesiastical authority. (Allocution Maxi-
ma quidem, 9th June, 18G2.)

58. No other forces are to be recognized than those
which reside in matter ; and all moral teaching and
moral excellence ought to be made to consist in the ac-
cumulation and increase of riches by every possible
means, and in the enjoyment of pleasure. (Allocution
Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862 ; Encyclical Quanta
eonficiamur, 10th August, 1863.)

59. Right consists in the material fact, and'all human
duties are but vain words, and all human acts have the
force of right. (Alloc. Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862. )

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 45

60. Authority is nothing else but the result of nu-
merical superiority and material force. (Allocution
Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862. )

61. An unjust act, being successful, inflicts no injury
upon the sanctity of right. (Allocution Jamdudum cer-
nimus, 18th March, 1861.)

62. The principle of non-intervention, as it is called,
ought to be proclaimed and adhered to. (Allocution
Novo8 et ante, 28th September, 1860.)

63. It is allowable to refuse obedience to legitimate
princes : nay more, to rise in insurrection against them.
(Encyclical Quipluribus, 9th November, 1846 ; Allocu-
tion Quisque vestrum, 4th October, 1847 ; Encyclical
Nbacitis et nobiscum, 8th December, 1849 ; Letter Apos-
tolus Cum Catholica, 26th March, 1860.)

64. The violation of a solemn oath, even every wick-
ed and flagitious action repugnant to the eternal law, is
not only not blamable, but quite lawful, and worthy of
the highest praise, when done for the love of country.
(Allocution Quibus quantisque, 20th April, 1849.)

VIII. ERRORS CONCERNING CHRISTIAN MARRIA.GE.

65. It cannot be by any means tolerated, to main-
tain that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a
sacrament. (Apostolical Letter, Ad Apostolicce, 22d
August, 1851.)

G(y. The sacrament of marriage is only an adjunct
of the contract, and separable from it, and the sacra-
ment itself consists in the nuptial benediction alone.
(Id. Ibid.)

67. By the law of nature, the marriage tie is not in-
dissoluble, and in many cases divorce, properly so call-
ed, may be pronounced by the civil authority. (Id.
Ibid ; Allocation Acei'bissim urn, 27th September, 1852.)

46 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

68. The church has not the power of Laying down
what arc diriment impedimenta to marriage. The civil

authority does possess such a power, and can do away
with existing impedimenta to marriage. (Let. Apost.
MultipHces inter, 10th June, 1851.)

69. The church only commenced in later ages to
bring in diriment impediments, and then availing her-
self of a right not her own, but borrowed from the civil
power. (Let, Apis . A<i Apostolicce, 22d Aug., 1851.)

70. The canons of the Council of Trent, which pro-
nounce censure of anathema against those who deny to

the church tlie right of laying down what are diriment

impedimenta, either are not dogmatic ormust he under-
stood as referring only to such borrowed power. (Let.
Apost. Ibid.)

71. The form of Bolemnizing marriage prescribed by
the said Council, under penalty of nullity, does not bind
in cases where the civil law lias appointed another form,
and where it decrees that this new form shall effectuate
a valid marriage. (Id. Ibid.)

72. Boniface Vlii. is the first who declared, that the
vow of chastity pronounced at ordination annuls nup-
tials. (Id. Ibid.)

i:\. A merely civil contract may, among Christians,
constitute a true marriage ; and it is false, either that
the marriage contract between Christians is always a
sacrament, or that the contract is null if the sacrament
be excluded. (Id. Ibid., Letter to King of Sardinia,
9th September, 1852; Allocution Acerbissimum, '27th
Sept., 1852 ; Multis gravibusque, 17th Dec, 1860.)

71. Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by
their very nature to civil jurisdiction. (Let. Apost. Ad
Apostolical, 22d August, 1851 ; Allocution Acerbistdmunij
27th September, 1852.)

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 47

N. B. Two other errors may tend in this direction,
those upon the abolition of the celibacy of priests, and
the preference due to the state of marriage over that of
virginity. These have been proscribed ; the first in the
Encyclical Qui pluribus, Nov. 9, 1846 ; the second in
the Letters Apostolical Multiplices inter, June 10,
1851.

IX. ERRORS REGARDING THE CIVIL POWER OF THE SOVEREIGN
PONTIFF.

75. The children of the Christian and Catholic
church are not agreed upon the compatibility of the
temporal with the spiritual power. (Let. Apost. Ad
Apostolicce, 22d August, 1851. )

76. The abolition of the temporal power, of which
the apostolic see is possessed, would contribute in the
greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the
church. (Alloc. Quibus quanlisque, 20th April, 1849.)

N. B. Besides these errors, explicitly noted, many
others are impliedly rebuked by the proposed and as-
serted doctrine, which all Catholics are bound most
firmly to hold, touching the temporal sovereignty of the
Roman pontiff. These doctrines are clearly stated in
the Allocutions Quibus quantisque, 20th April, 1849 ;
and Si semper antea, 20th May, 1850 ; Letter Apost.
Quum Catholica Ecclesia, 26th March, 1860 ; Allocu-
tions Novos, 28th Sept., 1860 ; Jamdudum, 18th March,
1861, and Maxima quidem, 9th June, 1862

X. ERRORS HAVING REFERENCE TO MODERN LIBERALISM.

77. In the present day, it is no longer expedient that
the Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion
of the state, to the exclusion of all other modes of wor-
ship. (Allocution Nemo vestrum, 26th July, 1855.)

78. Whence it has been wisely provided by law, in

48 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

some countries called Catholic, that persona coining to
reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their
own worship. (Allocution Acerbitarimum, 27th Septem-
ber, 1852.)

79. Moreover it is false, that the civil liberty of every
mode of worship, and the full power given to all of
overtly and publicly manifesting their opinions and
their ideas, of all kinds whatsoever, conduce more easily
to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to
the propagation of the pest of indifferentism. (Allo-
cution Nunquamfore, loth December, 1850.)

80. The Roman pontiff can and ought to reconcile
himself to, and agree with progress, liberalism, and
civilization as lately introduced. (Allocution Jamdu-
dum cernimus, 18th March, 1861.)

The Encyclical and Syllabus were felt on all hands,
have remarked, to be a blow struck at the con-
victions of the party which included some of the noblest
men in the Roman-catholic church. But the blow was
not necessarily a fatal one. The authority of the pope
was acknowledged on all hands, so that his utterance
had to be received with outward deference. But so
long as his infallibility was, as it had always been held
to be, a matter of open question, it could not be re-
quired that his dicta should control the inward convic-
tion. The lovers of civil and religious freedom through-
out Roman-catholic Christendom bent their heads in
silence until this sirocco blast from the Vatican should
be overpast. By-and-by there appeared, from the pen
of one of the most vehement but unstable of the adhe-
rents of the Liberal Catholic party — Bishop Dupanloup

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS. 49

of Orleans — a laborious attempt to prove that the En-
cyclical and Syllabus did not mean what they said ;
that they were aimed not at liberty but at license ; and
that the errorists condemned in them were not the in-
telligent advocates of a free press, free schools, and a
free conscience, but only the crazy adherents of lawless
socialism. This interpretation was utterly untenable ;
but it was convenient ; in fact, it was indispensable to
avert from the head of the Roman church the abhor-
rence of free men and free nations. Consequently, it
was adopted and defended by many ; and in the Uni-
ted States especially, the Syllabus was promulgated
only under such glosses and protestations on the part
of the hierarchy as quite turned the edge of it. The
Liberal Catholic party began to pluck up heart again ;
and the friends of absolutism in church and state felt
the necessity of some new device which should effec-
tually and finally crush their antagonists within the
church.

50 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTER III.
THE PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL.

The first announcement by the pope of his intention
to convoke a general Council was made in an addr<

his to an assembly of five hundred bishops at Rome,
June 2G, 18G7. Twelve months from that time, June
29, 18G8, the bull JEterni Patria was published, convo-
king the Council for the 8th of December, 1869.

The proposal of a Council was bv no means unac-
ceptable to the Liberal party. Confident in the rea-
sonableness and righteousness of their cause, they wel-
comed the prospect of submitting it to the judgment,
not of the knot of Italians in the unhappy city of Borne
that were the power behind the papal throne, but to
tlu1 assembly of bishops from every country, who, know-
ing from their practical experience what are the diffi-
culties which their church is subject to in its relation
with earnest, devout, and thoughtful men, what are the
scandals that bring odium upon it, what the almost
universal suspicions of its hatred to human liberty and
science, would be free to consider the remedies for
these things. Thoughts and plans of reform began to
take shape in their minds.* But they were not long
in discovering their mistake.

To get business in readiness for the Council, spe-
cial committees of theologians were nominated by the

* See Ce qui se passe ait, Concile, chap. 1. Pastoral of Bp. Du-
panloup of Orleans. (Transl. in Catholic World of September,
1870.) Lord Acton in North British Keview of October, 1870.
Cardinal Schwarzenberg's Desideria Patribus Concilii (Ecumcnici
proponenda, in Documcnta ad Ulustrandum Concilium, p. 280.

PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL. 51

pope, who assembled at Koine during the winter of
1868-9. The Liberal party perceived, to their dismay,
that these had been selected, not only without care to
represent the various phases of opinion within the
church, but with an apparent design to unite the most
extravagant advocates of the pope's favorite opinions.*
Contrary to usage and to fitness in such cases, the sub-
jects to be brought before the body were kept pro-
foundly secret from those who were to be called to
pronounce upon them.

Besides this direct preparation for the Council, a
more remote preparation had long been in progress.
For years, the question of the candidate's " soundness"
on points at issue between the parties of absolutism
and of liberty, had been considered at Rome, in the
appointment of bishops ; and the theological semina-
ries, in which historical studies had a strong tendency
to discourage belief in infallibility, had been steadily
manipulated in the interest of absolutism. f For years,
encouragement had been given to the holding of pro-
vincial synods, the transactions of which, in the first
place, were managed with undue influence from the
representative of the pope, and then the record of them
having been garbled by the expert hands of papal
politicians at Rome, sent back to be published in the
respective countries as the personal work of the bish-
ops themselves. J Religious associations were organ-

* Quirinus, p.*8. Ce qui se passe au Conc'de, p. 10.

f Catholic World, August, 1871, p. 593.

% This astounding charge, presented by the author of Ce qui se
passe au Conc'de, (p. 18,) as "sustained by certain and authentic
facts in the history of the church of France of late years," is cor-
roborated letter for letter from the history of the Roman church
in America, by the personal testimony of Archbishop Kenrick,
given below, p. 1^7.

52 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

ized under papal sanction among the laity of various
regions to pray and labor for the prevalence of the doc-
trine of the pope's infallibility. By-and-by books in
favor of this doctrine began to appear in regions where
it had not obtained currency, and influences were used
to draw even Liberal bishops into good-natured com-
mendation of them.* As the time of the Council ap-
proached, appliances of every sort were multiplied to
manufacture a factitious public opinion in the dioceses
of unwilling bishops, such as would constrain them at
least to withhold their opposition from the designs of
the absolutist party. The organization of the monastic
orders, and especially the Jesuits, afforded unbounded
facilities for this. The convents and clergy of each of
these orders are not subject to the bishops of the dio-
ceses in which they are situated, but report to separate
hierarchies of their own, each culminating in a general
who resides at Rome and is under the immediate orders
of the pope. Thus, in a contest in which the few re-
maining independent prerogatives of the bishops were
sought to be extinguished at last by the exorbitantly
increasing power of the pope, the latter had at his im-
mediate disposal in every diocese a force of "regular"
clergy, the natural rivais and enemies of episcopal
authority from which they were themselves exempt, f

* See Abp. Kenrick, p. 140.

f The author of Ce qui se passe au Concile gives, in long and
amusing detail, an account of the various devices used to bring
the Liberal bishops to terms of submission in advance of the Coun-
cil. The farewell letter of Bishop Dupanloup to his clergy, on
setting out for the Council, adverts to the same ■ ' effort made " (by
the pope's party) "to create a current in public opinion favorable
to their desires, and to bear down upon the assembled bishops
with all the pressure of this anticipatory judgment. Shall I go so
far," the bishop adds, "as to mention the pious artifices resorted
to for the same object ? Some have gone to the point of distribu-

PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL. 53

When the time seemed ripe, the purpose and pro-
gramme of the Council were announced in a formal
manifesto in the acknowledged newspaper organ of the
pope — the CiviUa Cattolica. In an article published
February 6, 1869, were set forth not only the points to
be accomplished, but the method of coming at them.
The doctrines of the Syllabus were to be promulgated,
the "four articles" of Gallicanism were to be anathe-
matized, and the infallibility of the pope to be declared.
It was easy to see that the last act, if performed, would
render the other two superfluous. Accordingly the
way of achieving this is laid out with great frankness.
The Council was to be very short — six weeks would be
long enough ; the minority, however eloquent, should
not be suffered to hinder the plan ; it was hoped that
without speeches or discussions, under an immediate
inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Council would de-
fine the dogma of infallibility by acclamation* The

ting in the streets— I saw it myself two years ago ; they are keep-
ing it up to this day — thousands of little handbills, with the vow
to believe in the personal and separate infallibility of the pope."
The letter may be found in the Appendix to vol. 2 of the Dis-
courses of Father Hyacinthe.

* In his Pastoral on the Council, Archbishop Manning, with
an effrontery which is absolutely overwhelming in view of such a
document as that above cited, treats the apprehension in the
minds of the Liberals of such a coup cf Hat on the part of the abso-
lutists, as mere causeless panic, the product of imagination. ' ' The
truth is, that nobody, so far as my knowledge reaches, and I believe
I may speak with certainty, ever for a moment dreamed of this defini-
tion by acclamation. All whom I have ever heard speak of these
rumors were unfeignedly amused at them." One is bewildered in
the attempt to answer this language of Archbishop Manning ; for
the very documents which he quotes in this Pastoral show him to
have been acquainted with the facts of which he denies the exist-
ence. See Petri Privilegium, 3. 37 ; "Janus," p. 5 ; Ce qui se passe
au Concile, pp. 25-29 ; Lord Acton in North British Review, Octo-
ber, 1870.

54 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

suggestion was simultaneously reduplicated, as if by

preconcert, by Bishop Plantier of Nimes, in an official
charge, as big as a book, on General Councils.

Everything seemed to favor the designs of the abso-
lutists. The press seemed to be occupied with utter-
ing their manifestoes, and to have no voice for the other
side. One ponderous pastoral after another rolled
forth from such prelates as Manning of Westminster
and Dechamps of Malines, in commendation of the pro-
posed dogma of infallibility, as being the universally
accepted dogma of the Roman-catholic church, and
men began to wonder whether the other side was to
have a hearing at all. So ill were the Liberal party
prepared tor the debate, that it was not till June, 1870,
that the first demonstration was made in their behalf
The first official word spoken by any bishop against the
proposed dogma was in the letters of Dupanloup of
Orleans, less than a month before the opening of the
Council.*

Ale an while, a book which will be memorable in the
history of literature, as one of the most crushing blows
ever struck in any controversy, had come forth, in
August, from a Catholic university in Germany, entitled
" The Pope and the Council, by Janus." It is the work
of more than one learned theologian of the Roman-
catholic church, and deals with the question of infalli-
bility from the root. It shows that the theological
opinion in favor of papal infallibility, as it has been
held by many in other ages, was the offspring of sheer
imposture and wholesale forgery, sustained and repeat-
ed from generation to generation ; and that many other
of the claims of the papacy rest on like foundation. It

* The chronology of this discussion is given in Ce qui se passe
au Coyicile, pp. 28-38.

PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL. 55

touches on the cases of alleged heresy and mutual con-
tradiction on the part of certain popes. And finally, it
exhibits the character of some of the former papal de-
crees, which the retrospective force of the new dogma
would certify to be infallible — too insulting to the in-
telligence of the present day to be tolerated by any
thinking man — and warns the bishops what are the
consequences of the act to which they are urged. The
warning has been disregarded, and the little book of
Janus needs only to be translated into another mood
and tense, to be the most convenient manual extant of
the present tenets now professed as infallible by the
church of Borne.*

After the arrival of the bishops at Rome, further
preparatory discussion in print was interdicted by the
pope, just as the bishop of Orleans was about to pub-
lish a reply to the ultramontanes. The interdict held
good against the minority till the close of the Council ;
but it was not found difficult for the partisans of infal-
libility to get permission to print, on their side, what-
ever might seem conducive to the success of their plans, f

* The authorized English translation of Janus (a beautiful
specimen of clear, neat, idiomatic translation into English) is pub-
lished in America by Roberts Brothers, Boston. Dr. Hergenrotker
in his book called Anti-Janus, (Catholic Publication Society, New
York,) attempts to answer Janus in detail ; but does not apprecia-
bly weaken the tremendous force of his main arguments. Dr.
Manning has hit upon the only really effective way of answering
Janus, in his fine argument, that if historical facts are opposed to
a dogma, it is all the worse for the facts. "The true and conclu-
sive answer to this objection consists .... in a principle of faith ;
namely, that whensoever any doctrine is contained in the divine
tradition of the church, all difficulties are excluded by prescrip-
tion." Petri PrivUegium, 3. 119.

+ Ce qui se passe au Concile, p. 38. This statement, which
seemed one of the hardest to believe against the pope and his
party, is incidentally confirmed by Archbishop Kenrick, p. 109.

5G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

But though the bishops were silenced, except so far
as they would consent to speak on the pope's side, other
voices continued to be heard in behalf of history mis-
represented and society imperilled. The most notable
and effective pamphlets issued, perhaps, were those of
the learned and courageous Father Gratry. His four
letters to the archbishop of Malinefl were an unrefuted
and irrefutable exposition not only of the fact that Pope
Honorius was condemned and anathematized as a her-
etic by the Sixth General Council, but also of the long
succession of frauds and forgeries by which the author-
ities of the church of Rome had sought to suppress
this fact from the knowledge of its devotees.*

But the progress of events was not, on the whole,
such as to encourage the hope of a free Council. The
undisguised intervention of the pope himself, with the
use of every kind of influence, official and personal, to
secure the adoption of the proposed dogma, and the
arrogance of the party of his adherents, increased
daily as the time for opening the Council drew near.
This party was emboldened, at last, to strike at the
foremost figure in the Roman-catholic pulpit — long the
object of its special hatred. The matchless eloquence
of Father Hyacinthe, his illustrious services to the
church of Rome, his devotion to the pope as the spirit-
ual head of the church, the ascetic purity of his life, his
faith and piety, were all of no account, in. view of the one
crime of his devotion to liberty and human rights. The
influence of " the party omnipotent at Rome " secured,
from the head of his monastic order, a letter of rebuke
and instruction, which was equivalent, for any honest

* The Letters of Father Gratry are published in an English
translation, in pamphlet, by Pott, Young & Co., New York. They
constitute a document of permanent value.

PREPAUATION OF THE COUNCIL. 57

preacher, to an interdict from further preaching. The
protest uttered by him in reply signalized and intensi-
fied the feelings of the two parties whose final conflict
was impending.

THE PEOTEST OF FATHEPv HYACINTHE.

To the Reverend, the General, of the Order of Barefooted

Carmelites, Home :

Very Reverend Father : During the five years of
my ministry at Notre Dame, Paris, notwithstanding
the open attacks and secret misrepresentations of which
I have been the object, your confidence and esteem
have never for a moment failed me. I retain numerous
testimonials of this in your handwriting, which relate
as well to my preaching as to myself. "Whatever may
occur, I shall hold this in grateful remembrance.

To-day, however, by a sudden shift, the cause of
which I look for not in your heart, but in the intrigues
of a party omnipotent at Rome, you find fault with
what you have encouraged, blame what you have ap-
proved, and demand that I shall use such language or
keep such a silence as would no longer be the entire and
loyal expression of my conscience.

I do not hesitate a moment. With speech falsified
by an order from my superior, or mutilated by enforced
reticences, I would not again enter the pulpit of Notre
Dame. I express my regret for this to the brave and
intelligent bishop* who placed me and has maintained
me in it against the ill-will of the men of whom I have
just been speaking. I express my regrets for it to the
imposing audience which there surrounded me with its
attention, its sympathies — I had almost said, its friend-
ship. I should be worthy neither of the audience, nor*

* Archbishop Darboy of Paris.
3*

58 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

of the bishop, nor of my conscience, nor of God, if I
could consent to play such a part in their presence.

At the same time, I withdraw from the convent in
which I dwell, and which, in the new circumstances
which have befallen me, has become a prison to my
soul. In acting thus, I am not unfaithful to my vows.
I have promised monastic obedience — but within the
limits of an honest conscience, and of the dignify of
my person and ministry. I have promised it under
favor of that higher law of justice, the "royal law of
liberty," which is, according to the apostle James, the
proper law of the Christian.

It was the most untrammelled enjoyment of this
holy liberty that I came to seek in the cloister, now
more than ten years ago, under the impulse of an en-
thusiasm pure from all worldly calculation — I dare not
add, free from all youthful illusion. If, in return for
my sacrifices, I now am offered chains, it is not merely
my right to reject them, it is my duty.

This is a solemn hour. The church is passing
through one of the most violent crises — one of the
darkest and most decisive — of its earthly existence.
For the first time in three hundred years, an (Ecumen-
ical Council is not only summoned, but declared "ne-
cessary." It is the word used by the holy father. Not
at such a moment can a preacher of the gospel, were
he the least of all, consent to hold his peace like the
"dumb dogs" of. Israel — treacherous guardians, whom
the prophet rebukes because they could not bark.

The saints are never dumb. I am not one of them ;
but yet I know that I am come of that stock— -fit it sanc-
torum sujnus — and it has ever been my ambition to
"place my steps, my tears, and, if need were, my blood
in the track of theirs.

PREPARATION OF THE COUNCIL. 59

I lift up, then, before the holy father and before
the Council, my protest as a Christian and a priest
against those doctrines and practices which call them-
selves Roman but are not Christian, and which, making
encroachments ever bolder and deadlier, tend to change
the constitution of the church, the substance as well
as the form of its teaching, and even the spirit of its
piety. I protest against the divorce, as impious as it
is mad, which men are struggling to accomplish be-
tween the church, which is our mother for eternity, and
the society of the nineteenth century, whose sons we
are for time, and toward which we have both duties
and affections.

I protest against that opposition, more radical and
frightful yet, which arrays itself against human nature,
attacked and revolted by these false teachers in its
most indestructible and holiest aspirations. I pro-
test, above all, against the sacrilegious perversion of
the gospel of the Son of God himself, the spirit and
the letter of which are alike trodden under foot by the
Pharisaism of the new law.

It is my most profound conviction that if France in
particular, and the Latin races in general, are delivered
over to anarchy, social, moral, and religious, the prin-
cipal cause of it is to be found, not certainly in Cathol-
icism itself, but in the way in which Catholicism has
for a long time been understood and practised.

I appeal to the Council now about to assemble, to
seek remedies for our excessive evils, and to apply them
at once with energy and with gentleness. But if fears
which I am loath to share should come to be realized —
if that august assembly should have no more liberty in
its deliberations than it now has in its preparation — if,
in a word, it should be robbed of the characteristics

GO THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

essential to an (Ecumenical Council, I would cry out to
God and man to demand another that should be truly
"assembled in the Holy Spirit," and not in party spir-
it— that should truly represent the universal church,
and not the silence of some and the constraint of
others. " For the hurt of the daughter of my people
am I hurt ; I am black ; astonishment hath taken hold
on me. Is there no balm in Gilead ? is there no phy-
sician there ? why then is not the health of the daugh-
ter of my people recovered?" Jer. 8 : 21, 22.

Finally, I appeal, Lord Jesus, to thy bar. Ad tuum,
Domine Jesut tribunal appeUo. In thy presence I write
these lines. At thy feet, having much prayed, much
pondered, much Buffered, and waited long — at thy feet
I subscribe tin in. And I have this trust concerning
them, that, however men may condemn them upon
earth, thou wilt approve them in heaven. Living or
dying, this is enough for me.

BROTHER HYACINTHE,
Superior of the Barefooted Carmelites of Paris,

Second Definitor of the Order in the province of Avignon

Pabis— Passy, September 20, 1869.

COMPOSITION OF THE COUNCIL. 61

CHAPTER IV.

THE COMPOSITION OF THE COUNCIL.

It is a very striking remark of Archbishop Kenrick,*
that the church, which was of old the model of repre -
sentative government to which civil society is indebted
for its rights and liberties, is transformed, by the ultra-
montane theories, to the most complete type of an
absolute despotism.

In the earlier councils, the bishops were the elective
officers of the local churches which they represented.
In later ages, when the liberties of the local and na-
tional churches were in danger of being lost in the
encroachment of the Roman see, they were taken under
the protection of the several civil governments. It was
an unhappy relation for the state to hold towards reli-
gion ; but it had, nevertheless, this advantage, that it
secured a certain measure of independence to these
churches and their bishops, and so gave a correspond-
ing measure of authority to their acts when assembled

* Infra, p. 121, note.

The same double antithesis has been stated by other writers.
That impressive little pamphlet, La Dernihe Ileure du Concile,
(said by Quirinus to be by an eminent member of the Council,)
puts it thus: "The church which once furnished to civil society
the model of a monarchy in which the aristocratic and popular ele-
ment effectively tempered the excesses of the supreme power — the
church which was the first to present to the modern world the
example of great assemblies discussing in freedom the rights of
truth and justice— is now presenting the spectacle of a Council
without liberty, and the menace of an absolutism without limit,"
p. 15.

62 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

in council. If the bishops assembled at Trent had
been the mere appointees of the pope, removable at
his nod, representing the choice neither of the clergy,
nor of the people and rulers of the different countries
of Christendom, there would have been, doubtl*
much greater unanimity in that Council, and it would
have reached its conclusions without protracted debate ;
but the conclusions, when readied, would have had
exactly the value, and no more, of a decree of the mas-
ter who created and convoked it.

By the silent revolution alluded to by the arch-
bishop of St. Louis, the Roman-catholic church had
been transformed, in the three hundred years between
the Council of Trent and the Council of the Vatican, to
just, such an organization as we have described. A
scanty minority only represented the poor remains of
the early autonomy of the churches.

According to an official statement published at
Rome, the number of the fathers then* sitting at the
Vatican with a voice in the deliberations was 759, seven
having died and four received leave of absence since
the Council opened. Out of these 759 prelates there
are reckoned in round numbers :

'50 cardinals ;

100 vicars-apostolic "revocable ad mitum;"

50 generals of orders and mitred abbots ;

* The statement was published some weeks after the opening
of the Council. The above analysis of the composition of the
Council is taken from Ce qui se pas.se au Concile, pp. 41 18. Like
many of the most damaging revelations and arguments of that
book, it is too well attested to be weakened by the violent denun-
ciations of the majority of the Council. On the contrary, the
proved accuracv of the book, wherever we are able to test it, gives
us reason to believe that its statements concerning the secret trans-
actions of the Council are true, aid the passionate contradictions
of them false.

COMPOSITION OF THE COUNCIL. 63

100 and more bishops of the Propaganda ;

276 Italians, 143 of whom belonged to the Papal
states.*

Outside of this enormous majority of 580 out of
759 votes evidently secured for the Vatican, only 180
bishops could be found whose churches still retained
till lately some measure of autonomy. These are the
Germans, the French, the Spanish, the Portuguese,
and those Orientals who are not of the Latin rite.

To appreciate the full bearing of these figures, it
must be remarked :

1. That the number of vicars-apostolic and func-
tionaries of the Roman curia (bishops in partibusff)
was never so large in any former Council ; and yet pro-
tests of the most earnest character were repeatedly
made against their presence, especially at Trent and
Constance.

2. That the Propaganda, the discipline of which is
like that of an army in the field, was founded by Greg-
ory XIII., in 1585, and is consequently later than the
Council of Trent. It includes the episcopates of Eng-
land, Holland, the United States, and various other
countries.

3. That in consequence of revolutions, episcopates
once regularly organized in such a way as to possess
some independence, find themselves at present without
resources, persecuted by their governments, and com-

* That is, according to the former boundaries, which included
2,600,000 souls. The states of the church at the opening of the
Council included only G72,000 souls.

f Bishops by brevet, having no dioceses or churches. When
for any reason it seems desirable to the court of Rome to raise any
person to the rank of bishop, without putting him into an actual
see, he is appointed nominally to some extinct church in partilms
injidelium, that is, in regions now occupied by heathen.

64 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

pletely given up to the discretion of the court of Rome,
which is their only reliance. Such is the condition of
the bishops of South America since the revolutions of
the last twenty years, of the Italian bishops since 1861,
and the Spanish since 1869.

4. That formerly the immense majority of the bish-
ops held their sees by the concurrence of the civil and
spiritual powers, which explains the jealous care with
which, in the deliberations of Councils, they stood out
for national independence and the peculiar traditions
of their several churches. At present, out of eleven
hundred episcopal titles in existence* there are scarcely
two hundred in the conferment of which the Catholic
nations retain any right whatever of interfering, wheth-
er through the prince, or through the chapters of cathe-
drals, or through the suffragans or the metropolitan.
Nine hundred are absolutely at the disposition of the pope
alone The efforts are notorious which the Roman curia
has put forth to annihilate the last privileges still re-
tained by France and the East.

5. That out of 180,000,000 of Catholics in the world,
France, Germany, and Portugal reckon 83,000,000 —
that is, nearly one half ; while, out of the 770 prelates
coming to the Council, these three nations— -the last
who retain anything of their religious independence —
are represented by only 156 bishops, or scarcely more
than one-fifth of that assembly.

As we have just seen, Italy, with the Papal states,
the population of which hardly reaches 25,000,000 of
Catholics, has 276 bishops in the Council.

The States of the Church, which included, even with-
in their earlier frontiers, only 2,600,000 souls, have 143
bishops, or nearly thirty times more, in proportion,
* Only 981 sees nre filled.

COMPOSITION OF THE COUNCIL. 65

than France, Germany, and Portugal. And if we con-
sider that the greater part of the bishops belonging to
the annexed provinces remained at Rome in absolute
dependence on the Holy See, it brings us to the enor-
mous proportion of one hundred and ten to one.

6. That more than one-half of the prelates assem-
bled at the Vatican were lodged and entertained, with
their suites, at the pope's own expense.

"With these materials, it might have seemed that
the party of absolutism were sufficiently secure of " a
good working majority," to leave the Council free to
conduct its own business. But the papal court did not
so judge.

G(J THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTER V.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL.

Among the conservative traditions of the canon law-
are these two: first, that while a majority vote may
suffice, in council, to enact decrees of discipline, which
bind only the outward conduct, and are repealable,

"moral unanimity" is necessary to the definition of
articles of faith, which are irrepealable and bind the
soul and conscience to an inward assent, under pain of
everlasting damnation; secondly, thai freedom of de-
liberation and action are necessary to the "oBCUmeni-
city" and authority of a General Council.

The dilemma of the Absolutist party was this :
Either they must concede liberty to the Council, in
which case free discussion and a free vote would result
in a manifest diversity of sentiment on the main ques-
tion; or they must secure an apparent unanimity by
the sacrifice of conciliar liberty. The choice bet
liberty and unanimity was a perilous one to then* plans ;
but it was boldly made. They decided to sacrifice lib-
erty for the sake of unanimity — and failed of both.

We have seen that the preliminary discussion of the
matter to be submitted to the Council was prevented
by the secrecy in which this matter had been prepared
by committees of theologians appointed by the pope
with reference to their partisan views. Arrived at
Rome, the bishops found themselves bound under in-
junctions of secrecy, forbidden to communicate with
each other in print, and forbidden to hold meetings of
those of the same language, for conference.

CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL. G7

At the first meeting of the Council, the rules of the
Council were announced in the bull MultipUces inter.
In this, "the pope* assumed to himself the sole initia-
tive in proposing topics, and the exclusive nomination
of the officers of the Council. He invited the bishoi)s
to bring forward their own proposals, but required that
they should submit them first of all to a commission
which was appointed by himself, and consisted half of
Italians. If any proposal was allowed to pass by this
commission, it had still, to obtain the sanction of the
pope, who could therefore exclude at will any topic,
even if the whole Council wished to discuss it. Four
elective commissions were to mediate between the
Council and the pope. When a decree had been dis-
cussed and opposed, it was to be referred, together
with the amendments, to one of these commissions,
where it was to be reconsidered with the aid of divines.
What the Council discussed was to be the work of
unknown divines ; what it voted was to be the work of
a majority in a commission of twenty-four. ... It was
further provided that the reports of the speeches should
not be communicated to the bishops ; and the strictest
secrecy was enjoined on all.

The means of information allowed to the bishops
on the business on which they were to act, were confined
to the personal study which they were able to give to
the schema during the several days — from four to eight
days generally, but sometimes less — between the distri-
bution of the papers and the discussion.

Anything like debate was precluded. Off-hand
remark was out of order. The speakers must give no-
tice in advance of their wish to be heard, previous to

* We take this summary of the bull from that eminent Catho-
lic, Lord Acton's, article on the Council, ubi supra.

G8 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the day of the session. They must speak in order of
their rank, without reference to the relevancy of any
speaker's remarks to those of his predecessors. No
reply was permitted.

The hall of the Council was so constructed — pur-
posely, as many believed* — as to make it almost im-
possible for speakers to be heard. The use of a dead
language, which few of the members could readily use
or understand, aggravated this difficulty.

The difficulty might have been relieved by allowing
the reports of the proceedings to be printed and sub-
mitted to the members ; but this, too, was not allowed.
Stenographic reports were made by official stenograph-
ers, to be locked up with the secret archives of the
Council. Something might have been done by means
of printed discussion, or by allowing the speakers to
print their speeches at their own expense. But this,
too, was forbidden, f In short, the members of the
Council were "forbidden to hear, forbidden to read,
forbidden to answer. "J

Obviously, the only place where the Council could
have any opportunity of taking part in the shaping of
its own business was in the committees of revision, to
which schemata that should be objected to at their first
introduction were to be referred for amendment. If
these could be properly constituted, by a free vote, in
such a way as to represent the various parties in the
Council, the acts of the Council might be framed to
express its views ; otherwise, not.

The pages of "Quirinus" and Ce qui se 2^asse an

* One of the Roman courtiers confessed this. Quirinus, p. 144.

t Ce qui se passe au Concile, pp. 59 -Gl. All these statements
are amply fortified by references.

| Ibidem, p. 62. One of the bishops declared the Council to
have been made deaf, dumb, and blind.

CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNCIL. 69

Concile charge that the appointment of these commit-
tees was carried by devices familiar to the less repu-
table forms of politics. But the charge had been
thrown into suspicion, by a sweeping denunciation of
falsehood against these volumes. The testimony of
Archbishop Kenrick shows that their gravest allega-
tions are true, and that the only one of these commit-
tees that reported any business, was unscrupulously
packed with partisans of infallibility.*

It might surely have seemed now that the Council
was sufficiently tied up by restrictions to be secure
against doing any harm to the plans of its managers.
But they were so far from being satisfied of this, that
on the 22d of February, 1870, after the Council had
been for more than two months in session, a new code
of fourteen rules was imposed upon it by a papal de-
cree. Four of these rules are worthy of note :

1. Originally, the bills, or schemata, reported by the
preparatory commissions, were liable to be discussed
in the Council before being referred to the Committee
of the Council for amendment. Under the new regola-
menio, all bills were to be referred without debate, and
instead of speaking thereupon, the bishops were at
liberty to send their observations upon the bill in wri-
ting to the committee, who would make a synopsis of
the various observations, at their discretion, and sub-
mit it in print to the members of the Council.

2 By Article X. of the new code it was provided
that any speaker might be called to order by the papal
legates for wandering from the question, and at their
discretion might be refused liberty to proceed. Of
course, no appeal from the decision of the chair was
allowed.

* Sec infra, p. 171.

70 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

3. By Article XL, the "previous question" might
be ordered by a sheer majority, and all debate cut off.

4. But the most important of these new rules was
that which, in defiance of all the precedents of ecclesi-
astical history, set aside the principle thai decrees of
faith could be enacted only by the "moral unanimity''
of the bishops, and provided that -" id decernetur quod
majoripatrum numero placuerit" — i. e., any decree might
be carried by a mere numerical majority.

When the edict imposing these new rules was rend,
it was felt on all hands that farther opposition to the
plans of the Absolutist party was desperate. "The
majority was omnipotent."*

The minority could only protest ; and this they did
in a very humble address to the pope's legates, which
concluded thus :

"As to the provisions concerning the number of
votes requisite to the settlement of epiestions of dogma,
which in fact is the main point, and that on which the
whole Council hinges, it is a matter of such grave
importance, that unless our reverent and most earnest
petition should be granted, the burden on our con-
sciences would be unendurable. "We should be afraid
that the character of this body as an (Ecumenical
Council would be called in question, and a handle
given to our enemies for attacking the holy see and
the Council, and that thus in the end the authority of
this Council w^ould be impaired with the Christian pub-
lic, as 'wanting in truth and liberty' — a calamity so
direful, in these uneasy times, that a greater could not
be imagined. "f

* Lord Acton's Article.

f Cited in the original by Quirmus. pp. 327-330. The entire
Protest is (riven in the Docum^ntn 'id iUustrandum OoncUuan.

. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 71

CHAPTER VI,
THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL.

The Council was opened with great pomp on the
8th of December, 1869.

A fortnight later,* the first part of a voluminous
draft of a decree was distributed, under the injunction
of secrecy, and on the 28th of December the debate on
it began. From the beginning, it seems to have been
admitted that the strength of the argument was with
the minority. The "schema" or draft was at once
severely handled ; Archbishop Conolly of Halifax rec-
ommended that it should be " decently buried. "f But
the -foremost figure in this and in all the subsequent
debates was a bishop from the remote province of Cro-
atia, on the frontier of Turkey, whose name, Stross-
mayer, soon became famous throughout the civilized

* In this very brief chronicle of the transactions of the Coun-
cil, which is intended only us a setting for the documents here
r jsented, many matters of importance to the history are necessa-
rily omitted. At this point the promulgation, just after the open-
ing of the Council, of the significant bull " Apostolicce Sedis," in
which many of the most offensive claims of the papacy, such as
its American apologists have been accustomed to repudiate or dis-
avow, shoiild, in a full history of the Council, have been recorded
at large. Those who would inform themselves more fully on the
events here briefly mentioned, are referred to the notable Article
by the Catholic Lord Acton, in the North British Review, October,
1870, (the best of the brief accounts of the Council, from one
whose opportunities of information were the best possible to an
outsider, and all whose important statements of fact are confirmed
by unimpeachable documents,) and to the more voluminous Let-
ters of Quirinus.

f " Ctnseo Sdiema cum honore esse sepdiendum."

72 THE VATTCAN COUNCIL.

world for the vehemence and copiousness of his Latin
eloquence, which could neither be repressed by the
rigor of the cardinal-presidents, nor made wholly inau-
dible by the excessively poor acoustic properties of
the Council-chamber, nor shut from the world by the
injunctions of secrecy. On the 30th of December he
inveighed in the following terms against the Schema,
as being a brutum fuhnen against errors long ago con-
demned, and not likely to be extinguished by new
edicts :

" Of what use is it to condemn what has been con-
demned already? "What satisfaction can we take in
proscribing errors which we all know to have been pro-
scribed beforehand? .... I admit that the false doc-
trines of sophists, blown about like ashes in a whirl-
wind, have corrupted multitudes, have infected the
genius of this age ; but does anybody believe that the
contagion of this kind of errors would not have spread,
if only they had been crushed with conciliary anathe-
mas ? For the support and safeguard of the Catholic
faith, no means and powers are committed to us, in
addition to groans and prayers to God, except Catholic
learning, which is always in harmony with right faith.
With the utmost assiduity, learning hostile to the faith
is cultivated among errorists ; for that reason it is high
time that true learning, the friend of the church, should
be cultivated and advanced by every means among
Catholics. . . . Let us stop the mouths of the detract-
ors who are constantly bringing against us the false
accusation that the Catholic church is the oppressor of
learning, and that it so trammels all free movements
of thought, that neither learning nor any other free-
dom of the mind can exist or nourish within it. . . .
On this account it needs to be shown, and to be made

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 73

manifest both by words and deeds, that there is in the
Catholic church real popular liberty, real progress,
real light, real prosperity."*

The first month of the Council was closing. A
"solemn session" had been appointed for the 6th of
January, 1870, at which it had h*en hoped that some-
thing— perhaps even the great doctrine of infallibility
itself — would have been ready to be publicly proclaimed
"with the approbation of the holy Council." But the
course of the debate had been too damaging to the
Schema that had been introduced, and the hope of
introducing and carrying the declaration of infallibility
by acclamation had been disappointed, f The solemn
session had to be filled up with dumb shows of cere-
mony, especially with the renewal of the public oath
that every bishop had already been compelled to take
at his consecration, in which he "promises and swears
true obedience to the pope of Rome, the vicar of Jesus
Christ."| It was not unreasonable to suppose that the

* Quoted in the original Latin by Lord Acton, p. 112, note,
American edition.

f Lord Acton declares that the purpose of " acclaiming " infal-
libility in time to promulgate it on the Gth of January, was foiled
by the resoluteness of Archbishop Darboy of Paris, who threatened
that in that case a hundred bishops stood ready to quit Rome
under protest, and, as he put it, to " carry away the Council in the
soles of their shoes," p. 112. See also Quirinus, p. 134. Arch-
bishop Manning's sneer at this statement in his Pastoral is of no
account, inasmuch as his testimony, and, as we are forced to add,
his veracity, on this subject are shamefully discredited by unim-
peachable documents.

X The Profession of Faith, or Oath, of Pius IV. may be found
in full in that very valuable book of reference on Tridentine Ro-
manism, entitled "Elliott on Romanism," published by the Meth.
Epis. Book Concern, vol. 1, p. 26. Those who wish to study the
Romish system as it was before the Vatican Council, will find this
book the best delineation «of it extant. The late Council, however,

Vatican Coiu* 11. 4

74 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

public renewal of this vow, in the midst of overawing
solemnities, might have an influence on the future
course of the Council.

Shortly after this solemn session of January 6th,
the draft of the Decree on the Faith, haying Buffered
severe damage in th* debate, was withdrawn, by the
managers of the Council, from further discussion, and
referred to the elected Committee of the Council on
Doctrine, for reconstruction. In its place was intro-
duced the draft of a decree on Discipline, which met no
kinder reception from men of liberal sympathies than
its predecessor. Already, at the beginning of the
Council, Cardinal Schwansenberg, in a paper distribu-
ted by him to the bishops, had Signified the hope of
many of the most earnest men in the hierarchy that
the Council, instead of narrowing the limits of free
opinion, and intensifying the rigor of administration,
might rather adapt the church, by wise modifications,
to the changed condition of the world, the prevailing
liberty of thought and speech and printing, the prog-
makes all former statements of the Koman system inadequate, by
incorporating with its infallible standards ten centuries of papal
edicts. Still, by adding to this scholarlike and accurate account of
Komanism as it was, the prophecy, now realized, of Romanism as
the doctrine of infallibility would make it, given in the work of
Janus, one will be furnished with a good beginning of informa-
tion on the subject-matter of the Roman-catholic controversy.

The oath of Pius IT. , above quoted, should not be confounded
with the bishop's oath of allegiance, temporal and spiritual to the
pope, which may also be found in Elliott, p. 30. In this oath, the
bishop elect swears : "I will help to keep and defend the Roman
papacy and the regalities of St. Peter, saving my order, against all
men. . . . The rights, honors, privileges, and authority of the holy
Roman church, of our lord the pope and his successors aforesaid,
I will endeavor to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. . . .
Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord or his successors
aforesaid, I will, to the best of my power* persecute and resist. "

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 75

ress of science, and the almost universal establishment
of constitutional instead of absolute governments. In
particular, he deprecated the enactment of the dogma
of infallibility as sure to be the occasion of grave evils
to the church ; he entreated that the abuses attendant
upon keeping up the index of prohibited books might
be abated ; that some of the mischiefs connected with
the usual mode of dealing with the subject of marriage
might be relieved ; that steps might be taken to adapt
the constitution of the clergy to the impending uni-
versal separation of church and state, and that, by
some other process than the absorption by Rome of all
the powers now held by civil governments ; and finally,
that something might be done to remedy the lamenta-
ble fact of the almost universal indifference of intelli-
gent laymen, in Catholic countries, to religion and the
church, by admitting them to some share in the work
and care of the parishes, and in the promotion of pop-
ular education.*

The provisions of the proposed decree on discipline,
tending in the opposite direction from any such reform,
roused again the fiery eloquence of Strossmayer, whose
speech of the 24th of Januaryf struck boldly at that
overgrown centralization and absolutism of govern-
ment which was the root of abuses in administration.
He protested against vesting the absolute government
of Christendom in a knot of Italians. He claimed that
others than Italians should be eligible to the papacy,
and that the " Roman congregations " which constitute
the bureaucracy of the church, and the college of car-

* The paper is quoted by Lord Acton, p. 109, and may be
found in full in Prof. Friedrich's Bocumenta ad lllustr. Cone. Vat,
p. 280.

t So Lord Acton, p. 113. Quirinus dates it on the 25th, and
gives a full abstract of it.

7G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

dinals, which is the close corporation that elects the
pope, should be made up of a proportionate represen-
tation from all Catholic countries. "The supreme au-
thority of the church," he said, "should have its throne
where the Lord had fixed his own, in the hearts and
consciences of the peojne, and that would never be
while the papacy was an Italian property." He de-
manded the frequent holding of Councils, open and
free, and cited the decree of the Council of Constance,
which required that they should be held every ten
years.

In view of the fact that the appointment of bishops,
formerly limited in various ways, is rapidly falling
under the absolute control of the pope, to the incalcu-
lable peril of the church, he urged that provincial syn-
ods should be invested with influence in the matter.
" He lashed with incisive words and brilliant arguments
those who preach a crusade against modern society,
and openly expressed his conviction that henceforth
the church must seek the external guarantees of her
freedom solely in the public liberties of the nations,
and the internal by intrusting the episcopal sees to men
filled with the spirit of Chrysostom, Ambrose, and
Anselm."*

This speech does not appear to have been answered.
It might not have been easy to answer it, and it cer-
tainly was not necessary. There was little danger that
in that assembly would be found many to sympathize
with the position or the spirit of the speaker. And
while they were sure that the voting would go mainly

* "The speech lasted an hour and a half, and the impression
produced was overwhelming. Bishops affirm that no such elo-
quence in the Latin tongue has been heard for centuries. Stross-
mayer does not indeed always speak classical Latin, but he speaks
it with astonishing readiness and elegance." Quirinus, p. 170.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 77

in one way, the managers of the Council were willing
enough that the argument should go altogether the
other way.

While this discussion was in progress, the document
was preparing which was to introduce the real work of
the Council. It was. felt on all sides that the matters
in debate were only secondary to the one great object
for which the Council had been called. Said one of
the leading organs of the papal party : "In fact, there
is only one question, and that is urgent and inevitable ;
the decision of it would facilitate the progress and set-
tlement of all the rest ; the delay of it paralyses every-
thing. Without it there is no beginning, nor the
chance of any."*

The document which was designed to precipitate
this question upon the Council was a petition to that
effect to the pope, signed by more than four hundred
bishops. Counter-addresses, deprecating the introduc-
tion of the question of infallibility, were signed by one
hundred and thirty-seven bishops. But the form in
which these counter-addresses were drawn gave evi-
dence of that fatal weakness of the minority which
marked all its movements as a body from first to last,
and proved the ruin of its cause : with the exception
of a comparatively few bold spirits, the minority meant
constantly so to conduct their opposition as to leave a
good chance to back down from it in case it was not
successful. Consequently the only common ground of
opposition on which the minority could be brought to
unite, was not that the proposed dogma was false,
(though many of them believed this,) but that the
definition of it was inopportune.

Meanwhile, a third schema, on the church, and a
* The Univers, February 9, 1870.

78 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

fourth, providing for a universal catechism, were intro-
duced, and debate dragged wearily on. Things were
not working well. In close and consecutive relation,
the monstrous system of Parliamentary roles of the
22dof February whs imposed, and on the 6th of March
the draft of the infallibility decree was distributed to
the bishops, and the discussion of it postponed, in
order to consider the first schema, which was reported
from the committee toward the end of March, amended
in such a way as to avoid the objections that had been
urged against it in the former debate. It seemed to meet
general acceptance, but for an expression in the pre-
amble, in which Protestantism is made responsible for
the various forms of modern unbelief — "the monstrous
systems that go by the names of mythisxn, rationalism,
indifferentism." It was not only this objectionable
clause, but the obnoxious regulations under which it
was about to be put to the vote, thai < ral bish-

ops in opposition, and on the 22d of March brought
Strossmayer again to the rostrum in a speech memora-
ble for itself and for the storm of violent interruptions
which it encountered. A considerable portion of this
speech is extant in the Latin text, from which we trans-
late :

"With all respect for these very learned men, let
me say that to my mind these assertions seem to be in
accordance neither with truth nor with charity. Not
with truth : it is true indeed that the Protestants have
committed a very grave fault in contemning and over-
ruling the divine authority of the church, and subject-
ing the everlasting and unchangeable truths of faith to
the judgment and decision of the subjective reason.
This incitement to the pride of man has given occasion
to evils unquestionably, very grave, such as rationalism,

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 79

criticism, etc. But in respect to this also, it ought to
be said that while Protestantism exists in connection
with rationalism, nevertheless the germ of rationalism
was already in existence in the sixteenth century, in the
so-called humanism and classicism which had been un-
advisedly fostered and nurtured in the very sanctuary
by certain men of the highest authority. And unless
this germ had existed beforehand, it would be impossi-
ble to conceive how so small a spark could have kin-
dled in the midst of Europe a conflagration so great
that to this day it has been found impossible to quench
it. And this other fact must be added : that contempt
of faith and religion, of the church, and of all author-
ity, originated independently of all relation or kindred
to Protestantism, in the midst of a Catholic nation, in
the eighteenth century, in the time of Voltaire and the
encyclopedists. . . . Whatever since that time may be
true of rationalism, I think the venerable committee
are entirely mistaken when, in tracing the genealogy
of naturalism, materialism, pantheism, atheism, etc.,
they assert that all these errors are exclusively the off-
spring of Protestantism. . . . The errors above enu-
merated are an abhorrence and abomination to the
Protestants themselves, as they are to us ; insomuch
that the church and we Catholics are beholden to them
for help and cooperation in resisting and refuting these
errors. Thus Leibnitz was a man of unquestionable
learning, and in every respect preeminent ; a man fair
in judging of the institutes of the Catholic church ; a
man brave in battling against the errors of his age ; a
man of the best spirit and worthy of the best reward
as a restorer of peace between Christian communions.
[Loud cries of 'Oh! oh!' The president, Cardinal de
Angelis, rang the bell, and said, 'This is no place for

80 THE VATICAN' COUNCIL.

praising Protestants.'] Such men as these (and there
are many such in Germany and England and North
America) are followed by a great multitude among the
Protestants, to all of whom we may apply these words
of the great Augustine: 'They err, but they err in
good faith; they are heretics, but they consider us
heretics. They did not invent the error, but inherited
it from parents misled and brought up in error, and are
ready to give it op the moment they are convinced.'
[Hero there was a long interruption and ringing of the
bell, with cries of 'Shame! shame T 'Down with the
heretic!'] All these, although they do not belong to
the body of the church, do nevertheless belong to its
soul, and are partakers in the blessings of redemption.
All these, in the love they bear toward Jesus Christ
our Lord, and in those positive troths which they have
Bayed from the shipwreck of the faith, are in possession
of so many means of divine grace, which the mercy of
God may use to bring them to the ancient faith and
church, unless we, by our excesses and short-sighted
offences against the charity we owe them, shall put far
away the time of the divine mercy. As to charity, it
certainly forbids to meddle with the wounds of another
with any other object than to cure them — an object
which this enumeration of the errors to which Protes-
tantism might have given rise, does not seem to me
adapted to accomplish. . . .

" By the decree which has recently been communi-
cated to us as a supplement to the internal regulations
of the Council, it is determined that in this Council
questions shall be settled by the majority of votes.
Against this principle, which overthrown from the
foundation all the practice of former Councils, many
bishops have protested, but have received no reply.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 81

But in a matter of such moment, there should be given
a reply clear, perspicuous, and void of all ambiguity.
It looks to the uttermost calamity of this Council, for
it certainly will give occasion to this and to future gen-
erations to say. that this Council lacked liberty and
truth. For my part, I am convinced that the eternal
and unchangeable rule of faith and tradition has always
been, and must always continue to be the rule of com-
mon consent — of at least moral unanimity. The Council
which, overriding this rule, should undertake to define
dogmas of faith by a numerical majority, according to
my inmost conviction would by that fact forfeit the
right of binding the conscience of the Catholic world
under the sanction of life and death eternal."

All the latter part of this speech was delivered in
the midst of a great uproar, with furious demonstra-
tions of excitement from the bishops and continual
ringing of the president's bell, by which, at last, the
speaker was silenced.*

* The accounts of this scene are given through many different
channels, and are strikingly confirmatory of each other's accuracy.
The account in Ce qui se passe au (Joncile is as follows :

"In the general congregation of March 23d, Bishop Stross-
mayer asked for the softening of some violent expressions of the
schema ' De Fide,' which made the Protestants responsible for athe-
ism, materialism, and rationalism. In support of his point, he cited
Leibnitz in the seventeenth century and Guizot in the nineteenth,
as having been even useful auxiliaries to the church. At these
words, violent interruptions and groans broke out. They were
redoubled when the speaker said that there might be Protestants
who were such in good faith. But the uproar reached its highest
pitch when Bishop Strossmayer demanded that questions of dog-
ma should be decided only by moral unanimity.

1 ' The president, who had before interrupted him, called him
to order, and forbade him to continue.

"Confused cries broke out on all sides: 'Descendat ab ambone !
descenclat ! Hcereiicusf J Ferret) ens ! Damnamus eum! Damna-

VV'.S /'

4*

82 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

On the next day the silenced speaker sent in his
protest to the presidents of the Council in these terms :

.... "Yesterday, when I had stated this question
from the platform, and had offered some remarks on

the necessity of morally unanimous consent in defining
matters of faith, I was interrupted, and in the midst of
a very great uproar mxl severe threats [inter maximum
tumultum et graves comminationes] I was deprived of
the power of continuing my speech.* And this very
serious circumstance adds proof more clear than ever
of the necessity of having an answer to this question
that shall be clear and void of all ambiguity. I there-
fore most humbly petition that such an answer may be
given at the next general congregation. Other \ !
should be in doubt whether it would be possible to re-
main in a Council where the liberty of the bishops is so
oppressed as it was yesterday oppressed in my person,

"One bishop having said, 'At ego riof the cry was

repeated more violently than hefore, lDamma$muI TktnaumMst

Bishop Stroasmayer was forced to descend from the tribune with-
out finishing, but as he left it he repeated energetically three times,
'Protestor! protestor! protestor!' The noise of the tumult pene-
trated into the interior of St. Peter's church ; and some supposing
that they were dealing with infallibility, shouted, ' Long live the
infallible pope !' others, 'Long live the pope— but not infallible !' "

Quirinus compares the hall of the Council to a "bear-garden
of demoniacs," and declares that "several bishops sprang from
their seats, rushed to the tribune, and shook their fists in the
speaker's face." Pp. 3S5, 426.

On the other hand, the account of Archbishop Maiming is in
serene and beautiful contrast with all other testimonies: "Occa-
sionally murmurs of dissent were audible ; now and then a com-
ment may have been made aloud. In a very few instances

expressions of strong disapproval and of exhausted patience at
length escaped. But," etc. Petri Pnvilegium, 3. 27.

* Compare Archbishop Manning, ubi supra, " But the descrip-
tions of violence, outcries, menace, denunciation, . . . I can affirm
to be calumnious falsehoods."

PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 83

and where dogmas of faith are to be denned in a manner
new and hitherto unheard-of in the church of God."*

The argument, though interrupted and silenced,
was not entirely in vain. At the last moment, the
obnoxious preamble was withdrawn, and a conciliatory
substitute, dexterously drawn by the hand of an emi-
nent Jesuit, was offered in its place. With exquisite
adroitness, the managers took advantage of the reac-
tion of good feeling consequent on their act of concili-
ation, to introduce a little addition to the schema, "just
to round it off handsomely," to the effect that all papal
edicts ought to be observed, even when they proscribe
errors not denned as heretical. The fathers of the
minority made wry faces over the new amendment, and
it required extraordinary efforts, public and private,
and the most formal and solemn assurance from the
committee that reported it, that it had no doctrinal
application whatever — that in fact it was meant rather
for ornament than for use — to induce them to vote for
it. "With grave misgivings they suffered themselves,
Strossmayer alone excepted, to be led into the trap
that had been laid for them ; and when it had been
sprang by their own reluctant vote at the public session
of April 24th, and they were helplessly fastened, they
were openly and impudently twitted by Archbishop
Manning that they had now, to all intents and pur-
poses, admitted the doctrine of infallibility, and that
there was no room left for backing down — " ncc ab ea
rccedcre nunc licere"^ With this act "the opposition
was at an end. "J

* For the original text of speech and protest, see Lord Acton's
Article, pp. 115, 116.

f Quirinus, pp. 436, 460 ; Lord Acton, p. 116. But for the
details of this successful plot, see the testimony of Archbishop
Kcnrick, bolow, p. 163. { Lord Acton, p. 117.

84 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The remaining history of the Council may be briefly
told.

The draft of the decree of infallibility which had
been for many months in process of incubation in the
pope's committee of theologians, was distributed to the
members of the Council on the 8th of May, and their
written observations on it called for, delivered to the
committee of the Council, digested into a synopsis, and
this printed and distributed to the members within a
week's time.* The debate on the general subject began

* The following extracts from tin- Si/nopsis are given in the
Latin text by Lord Acton, p. 118. One bishop averred "that it
wus perfectly clear to his mind that if infallibility were once dog-
matically defined, there would be, in his own diocese, in which
not a vestige of the tradition of the infallibility of the Holy Father
had ever been found, and in other regions* a defection from the
faith on tho part of many prisons, and not only those of small
account, but those held in the highest estimation. " — "If the dog-
ma is promulgated, the progress of conversions in the confederate
provinces of America will be completely extinguished. Bishops
and priests, in their discussions with Protestants, will have noth-
ing to say in reply." [This observation is doubtless founded on
the fact that in almost every considerable discussion extant be-
tween Romanists and Protestants, some Protestant argument is
evaded by disclaiming the ex cathedra utterances of the popes as
being of no binding authority in the church, and denouncing the
alleged doctrine of papal infallibility as "a Protestant invention.'"]
"By this definition, non-Catholics, among whom not a few, and
those the best, especially at this time, are craving a firm basis of
faith, would find their return to the church rendered difficult, and
indeed impossible." — "Those who would wish co obey the decrees
of the Council will find themselves entangled in the greatest diffi-
culties. Civil governments will consider them (and not without
the show of probability) to be subjects of doubtful loyalty. Ene-
mies of the church will not be slow to annoy them by flinging at
them the errors which popes are said either to have taught, or by
their actions to have sanctioned, and the only replies which it is
possible to offer will be received with ridicule." — "The decree, of.
itself, defines in bulk even-thing that has ever formerly been defined
in papal instruments. . . . If the definition is admitted, [the pope"]

PKOCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 85

on the 14th of May. At the close of exactly three weeks,
on the 3d of June, while forty-nine bishops were still
waiting to be heard, all further discussion was abruptly
interdicted, and the majority of the Council pressed
forward to the new and hazardous experiment, in the
Roman-catholic church, of proclaiming as a dogma, to
be received under pain of eternal damnation, that which
part of the episcopate did not believe.*

After some supplementary debate on the details of
the decree, a private vote was taken, which showed 88
negative votes ; 61 votes in a qualified affirmative ; and
91 bishops who abstained from voting, although pres-
ent in Rome.f

will have power to decide on temporal dominion, or the extent of
it, on the power of deposing kings, on the usage of coercing here-
tics."— "The doctrine of papal infallibility seems to me to have no
foundation whether in the Holy Scripture or in church tradition.
Indeed, unless I mistake, Christian antiquity held the contrary doc-
trine."— " The phraseology of the schema implies the existence, in
the church, of a double infallibility— that of the church itself and
that of the pope— which is absurd and unheard-of." — "If I were
to use the subterfuges which have been used by not a few theolo-
gians in the case of Honorius, I should make myself a laughing-
stock. To resort to sophistries seems to me unworthy both of the
episcopal office and of the nature of the subject, which ought to
be treated in the fear of God." — "Many of the authorities which
are quoted in proof of it, even by the most esteemed of the class
of theologians called ultramontane, are mutilated, falsified, inter-
polated, garbled, spurious, twisted out of their proper meaning. " —
"I venture to assert that the opinion [of infallibility] as it lies in
the schema, is not a doctrine of the faith, and cannot be made
such by any definition whatever, even definition by a Council."

* Parts of the speeches of Archbishops Purcell of Cincinnati
and Conolly of Halifax are given by Quirinus and Lord Acton ;
and the speech of Archbishop Darboy is given in full in the Ap-
pendix to Quirinus, pp. 819, 833. Part of the Latin original is
given by Acton, pp. 118, 119, nole.

f The names of these 240 bishops are given by Quirinus, pp.
778-785. A slight discrepancy of figures will be remarked between
this and the statement in the next note.

8G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The voters in the negative 1 * it Rome in a body on
the 17th of July, the day before the public vote was to
be taken, leaving behind them a sorrowful protest,* in

* The document is given, in Latin, in Quirinus, pp. 797 7'.'!»,
and is as follows :

Most Blessed Fatiiki: : In the general congregation held <>n
the 13th instant, we gave ont votes on the achrma of the first
dogmatic constitution de EcdesiA GhrlsH.

Your Holiness is aware that there were 88 fathers who, moved
by stress of conscience and by love for the holy church, voted by
the words "non placet," 02 others who voted by the words "plaed
juxta modum," and finally, about 70 who absented themselves from
the congregation, and abstained from voting. To these are to be
added others who, on account of illness or other weighty reasons,
have returned to their dioc

For this reason, our votes have been known and manii
Your Holiness and to all the world, and it has been made plain
how many bishops approve of onr opinion, and in this way we dis-
charge the duty and office inoumbenl upon us.

Since that time, nothing certainly has occurred to change our
views, but on the other hand many things, and those of the gravest
character, have taken place, which have settled us in our determi-
nation. We therefore declare that we renew and confirm our votes
already given.

Confirming, then, our votes, by this writing, we have decided
to absent ourselves from the public session to be holden on the
18th instant. For that filial piety and reverence which, but a brief
time since, brought our representatives to Your Holiness' feet, do
not suffer us, on a question so closely concerning the person of
Your Holiness, to say "non placet" openly to the pope's face.

And furthermore, the votes to be given in the solemn session
would be only a repetition of the votes already elicited in the gen-
eral congregation.

Without delay, then, we return to our flocks, where, after so
long an absence, we are very greatly needed, on account of the
alarms of war, and especially on account of their extreme spirit-
ual wants ; lamenting that in consequence of the unhappy circum-
stances with which we are surrounded, we are likely to find the
peace and repose of consciences among our believing people bro-
ken up.

Commending, meanwhile, with all our heart, the church of
God and Your Holiness (to whom we profess unfeigned faith and

PllOCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL. 87

the hands of the pope. Two only, one of- whom was
Bishop Fitzgerald of Little Rock in the United States,
had the courage to be present at the public session on
the 18th of July, and boldly give their public votes in
the negative.

The new doctrine was promulgated July 18, 1870,
in the midst of a storm which darkened the church of
St. Peter's. Within a few hours there burst over
Europe a storm of war, which stayed not until it had
swept away the throne of the infallible pope from un-
derneath him.

obedience) to the grace and keeping of our Lord Jesus Christ, we
remain

Your Holiness' most devoted and obedient sons.
Rome, July 17, 1870.

88 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTER VII.

THE SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENBICK.

Whkn, on the third day of June, 1870, the deb
of the Council on the main question were suddenly
silenced, there remained on the list of those who hud
signified their intention to speak, the names of some
forty bishops who were still unheard. They were for-
bidden by the rules of the Council even to print their
views so much as for private circulation among the
bishops; and the spiritual prohibition was reinf
by police arrangements which Locked eyery printing-
office in Rome against them. An American prelate,
however, Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis, refused to
be thus gagged. Claiming a "divine right to express
his convictions on this most important question to his
fellow-bishops," he sent the carefully prepared manu-
script of his Latin speech to a printer in Naples, where
under the flag of an excommunicated king, might be
found that liberty for the bishops of the church which
was denied them in the States of the Church itself.

The solid octavo pamphlet of one hundred pages
which was the result of this enterprise, was distributed
among the members of the Council with scrupulous
care, lest, becoming known to outsiders, it might reveal
with an undeniable mark of authenticity those facts in
the interior history of the Council, which, when report-
ed by irresponsible correspondents, it was so easy to
deny with a show of indignation. Furthermore, that
fatal forethought with which the opposition, by looking
out constantly for a line of retreat, had constantly

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 89

weakened their own cause, was an additional motive
for keeping the speech private. In case its earnest
arguments should be disregarded or overborne by the
majority, and the dogma be adopted, it was important
to keep the bold statements of this "unspoken speech"
hushed up, in order that the author of it might, if
worst should come to worst, by-and-by avoid the em-
barrassment of publicly repudiating his own printed
words, and of accepting under constraint, what he
could not be brought to accept by argument.

It was vain to suppose that documents confiden-
tially printed in editions of 700 could always be kept
from the public. One of the copies of this speech has
come, by a roundabout course, to our hands. For its
intrinsic ability and its incidental historical value, it is
entitled to be spread before the public without abridg-
ment.*

* Since this translation was written, a second Latin copy of the
speech has come to hand, in Professor Friedrich's Documenta ad
illustrandum Concilium YaUeanum. The original having been thus
made accessible to scholars, we are excused from the necessity of
cumbering this edition in English with the entire Notes and
Appendix attached by the author to his work.

CONCIO
PETRI RICARDI KEMICK

ARCfflEPISCOPI S. LUDOVICI

IN STATIBUS FCEDElt ATIS
AMERICA SEPTENTRIONALIS

IN

CONCILIO VATICANO

HABENDA AT NON HABIT A

O Timothee, depositum custodi, devitans profanaa
vooam novitates et oppositiones falsi uominis
scientiae, quam quidani promittentes circa
Mem exciderunt. 1 Tim. vi. 20. 21.

Non super uno Petro veruni super omnes aposto-
los apostolorumque successorea, Ecclesia Dei
aediflcatus. pAscHAsirs Radbertus.

Lib. viii. In Matt. xvi.

NEAPOLI

TYPIS ERATRUM DE ANGELIS

IN VIA PELLEGRINI 4

MDCCCLXX

SPEECH

OF

PETER RICHARD KENRICK,

ARCHBISHOP OF ST. LOUIS

IN

THE UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA,
PREPARED FOR SPEAKING BUT NOT SPOKEN

IN THE

VATICAN COUNCIL.

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to
thy trust, avoiding profaue and vain bab-
blings, and oppositions of science falsely so
called, which some professing have erred
concerning the faith. 1 Tim. 6 : 20, 21.

Not on Peter only, but on all the apostles
and their successors, is built the Church
of God. Paschasius Radbebt.

Book viii, on Matt. 16.

NAPLES,

DE ANGELIS BROTHERS, PRINTERS,

4 VIA PELLEGRINI.

1870.

NOTE.

The reason why this speech was not delivered,
although prepared for that purpose, is this — that on
the third day of June, at the close of the general con-
gregation, a stop was unexpectedly put to the general
discussion on the first schema concerning Catholic faith.
Among forty bishops, more or less, who had entered
their names as desiring to be heard, was the writer of
the following. He has deemed best that his divine
right of expressing his views on this momentous busi-
ness to his fellow-bishops, and to others who are enti-
tled to an interest in the Council, should be exercised
through the press. But he has retained the form of a
speech, and some matters that would be pertinent only
in a spoken discourse.
Eome, June 8, 1870.

CONTENTS OF THE SPEECH.

1 Introduction : The occasion of the speech.

I. The writer's "Observations" vindicated.

[1. To allege that all the apostles, as well as Peter, are styled
the foundation, does not impair the argument in favor of the pri-
macy of the pope.

2. There is no argument for papal supremacy in John 21 : 16, 17.

3. The word faith in Luke 22 : 32 means only trust, and there-
fore yields no argument for infallibility.]

II. The universal jurisdiction of the apostles still
continues in the whole body of bishops.

[The argument of the archbishop of Dublin is suicidal. If the
promise made to all the apostles is not fulfilled in their successors
the bishops, then the promise made to Peter does not hold good
to iris successors in the see of Rome. ]

III. The scriptural proofs of the primacy of the
Eoman pontiff brought to the test.

[1. The primacy of the Roman see is proved by tradition.

2. It cannot be proved by Scripture : Exegesis of Matt. 16:18,
10 ; John 21:16, 17 ; Luke 22:32.

3. Resume of the argument.]

IY. Views of the late F. P. Kenrick, archbishop of
Baltimore.

V. The assent of "the Church Dispersed."

[1. The assent has a negative value.

2. Not sufficient for the definition of new dogmas.

3. Instance of the bull Unam Sanctam which proclaimed ex
cathedra the doctrine of the subjection of temporal governments
to the pope, and had universal assent, but is now generally, though
not universally, repudiated, ]

VI. Former views of M. J. Spalding, present arch-
bishop of Baltimore.

VII. Speech of the archbishop of Westminster. No
substantial distinction between doctrine of faith and
doctrine of the Catholic faith.

94 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

[Distinction between theology and faith.

Councils are infallible in testifying, not in alleging reasons of
opinion.

This distinction has been lost sight of.

Objection : This argument impeaches the doctrine of the im-
maculate conception.

Answer : This doctrine is not defide.]

VIII. The Infallibility of the Pope has not been

taught as a doctrine of faith in England, or Ireland, or

the United States of America.

[Whether true or false, it never oaa be made an article of faith,*
even if the Council should define it.

1. It has never been so tanghf by (he church ;

2. But has been impugned by her, almost everywhere but in
Italy, and especially in England. Jr. -land, and the United Stat. s.

3. Even by the Pltramontanee it has been tanght only as free
opinion.

Instances: "Roman-catholic Principles;" Archbishop Spal-
ding's Sermons.

It is mentioned only to disclaim it, when alleged by Protes-
tants.

Testimony of Irish tradition.

It was solemnly disclaimed when Catholic emancipation was in
question.]

IX. A Case of Conscience.

X. The "Charisma" of Infallibility.

XL The addition to the first Decree de Fide,
[The trick played upon the minority.
Sinister influences in the Council.

Conclusion : The precipitation of the question a calamity to
the church and the world. ]

APPENDIX.

A. Second Plenary Council of Baltimore.

[Undue influence of the papal legate, and tampering with the
record. ]

B. The Committee on Faith.

[Manipulation of Elections. Packing of the Committee. Ser-
vitude of the Council.]

Most Eminent Presidents; Most Eminent and
Eight Reverend Fathers:

The Most Reverend the Archbishop of Dublin,
in his speech from this platform, has said some things
by which my honor is sorely wounded. It was in
vain that I begged permission of His Eminence the
president to reply at once, at the close of his speech,
or at least at the close of that day's general congre-
gation. Therefore it is that, contrary to my previous
purpose, I take the floor to-day to speak on the
schema in general that is offered for our adoption;
for I had taken for granted that everything pertinent
to the subject would be more fully and forcibly said
by others than I could say it. I entreat your par-
don, most eminent and right reverend fathers, if I
seem to weary you with a longer speech than I am
wont to make. I only ask that you will grant me
that liberty which (as Bossuet says) well becomes a
bishop addressing bishops in Council, and having
respect rather to the future than to the present — in
the confidence that I will not wander from the scope
of the schema, nor say anything which can give just
offence to any one — least of all to the most eminent
the archbishop of Dublin, to whom I acknowledge
my very great obligations, to whom I have always
looked up with respect, for these thirty years and
more, and wliom I hope and trust I shall continue to
respect to my latest breath. With which preliminary
words I come to the subject.

96 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

I. The observations numbered one hundred and
thirty-eight in the synopsis, on which His Eminence
of Dublin so severely reflects, I acknowledge to be
mine. I wrote in them nothing but wliat I thought,
and (except so far as may appear to the contrary
from the present speech) nothing but what I still
think. Three points thereof have been attacked in
terms of special severity by the most reverend ] (rel-
ate. First, that I said, on page 217, that all the
other apostles were designated by the same name of
foundation which was applied to Peter; which seem-
ed to him to impair the proof of the primacy of the
Roman pontiff deduced by theologians from that
word. The blame of this, to be sure, should not be
laid on me, but on St. Paul and St. John. Rut that
this was the furthest possible from my intention is
proved by the words which I used, as follows: "The
words of Christ, Thou art Peter, etc., certainly show
that a privilege was conferred by Christ on Peter
above the other apostles, so that he should be the
primary foundation of the church ; which the church
has always acknowledged, by conceding to him the
primacy both of honor and of jurisdiction." I de-
nied, indeed, that by virtue of that ward foundation
the gift of infallibility was conferred upon Peter
above the other apostles; since no mortal ever
thought of claiming this privilege for the other apos-
tles and then successors from the mere fact that they
too had been honored with the same title of founda-
tion. I then showed it to be a false inference that
the stability of the church was derived from the

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 97

strength of the foundation, since Christ had signified
that he would provide for each of these in some
other way; that is, in the words, addressed to all
the apostles, Peter with the rest, "Lo, I am with
you always, even to the end of the world." It is
hardly fair to say that by this line of reasoning I
had either assailed or meant to assail the common
arguments for the primacy derived from Christ's
words, " Thou art Peter," etc. But I shall show, by-
and-by, that the most reverend archbishop himself,
by the line of reasoning which he adopts in speaking
of the other apostles, and their successors the bish-
ops, not only impeaches this argument for the pri-
macy, but utterly destroys it.

Secondly, the archbishop of Dublin asserted,
and that with emphasis, that what I had written
about John 21 : 10, 17, was not true; to wit, that the
words lambs and sheep which there occur in the Vul-
gate version — from the distinction between which,
by an argument more subtle than solid, some were
wont to infer that both bishops and simple believers
are committed to the pastoral care of the Roman
pontiff as Peter's successor — corresponded to one
and the same word, -npofiuTLa, in the Greek text ; and
that therefore the argument was groundless. I can-
not sufficiently wonder that the most reverend arch-
bishop should have ventured to put forth such an
assertion ; especially, as in talking about it, he seemed
to get the word ^poparta changed for KpojSura. The
Greek text revised a few years since, in accordance
with the oldest manuscripts, by Tischendorf, (to

98 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

whom, if I remember correctly, the pope sent a letter
of approval for the work which, after vast labor, he
had so successfully accomplished,) shows that I was
right. I have here the seventh edition, published in
1859, from which I will read the entire passage, add-
ing to the successive answers of Christ, the Vulgate
version of them,* so that you may plainly perceive
that His Eminence of Dublin lias been affected in this
matter by some measure of human fallibility. Let
me add, that on the arch over the pope's throne in
St. Peter's church, where these verses are displayed
in Greek, you may read Kpop&na, but not qrfltra.

In the little work D< Pontificia Inftdtibilitate, almost
of the same tenor as the Ohs< rvations aforesaid, which
1 had printed lately at Naples, by a typographical
error the word wpSpara occurs instead of irpopdna, as it
was in my manuscript, and as it appears in the Sy-
nopsis. But, after all, it is a fact that in the Greek
text of Halm the same word irpopara does correspond
to both the words, lambs and sheep, in the place cited.
But the only difference produced by the variation of
reading is this : In Teschendorf's text there is noth-
ing whatever to correspond to the word sheep ; for
npoSuTia means either little lambs or little sheep, but not
sheep at all. But in the other text, of Halm, the word
Kpo&ara signifies sheep; notwithstanding which the
author of the Yulgate version chose to make a vari-
ation, by rendering the same word irpopara in one case

* John 21:15. Boone tu upvia fiov — Pasce agnos meos.

1C. UoiuaivE tu TipopuTiu fiov — Pasce agnos meos.
17. Boone tu Tzpoi3driu [xov —Pasce oves meas.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KEN1UCK. 99

by lambs and in the other by sheep.* My assertion,
which the archbishop of Dublin over and over again
declared with such emphasis to be untrue, is shown
to be absolutely true, whichever of the two readings
is adopted. As to the Oriental versions cited by His
Eminence, I do not care to speak, being satisfied to
have demonstrated the truth of my assertion. But
from what I shall say by-and-by, it will appear that
it is of trifling consequence what sense we attribute
to these words, since I shall easily show that (con-
trary to what I had said in the Observations) no in-
ference can be derived from them in support of the
infallibility, or even of the primacy, of the pope.

In the third place, the most reverend archbishop
calls me to account for what I said concerning the
word faith in Luke 22 : 32 ;f that that word was never
used by our Lord to mean the system of doctrines,
(in which sense alone it can afford any ground for an
argument in support of papal infalhbility,) and not
more than once or twice to mean that act of super-
natural virtue with which we believe in God making
revelation of himself. I asserted that by that word

[* There is a decree of the Council of Trent in these terms:
. . . . " The sacred and holy Synod . , . . doth ordain and declare
that the said old and Vulgate edition .... be, in public lectures,
disputations, preachings, and expositions, held as authentic ; and
that no one is to dare or presume to reject it under any pretext
whatsoever." Act. Cone. Trid., Sess. 4. How Archbishop Kenrick
justifies himself in rejecting the Vulgate version of this text, in
favor of the true reading and correct translation, we are not pre-
pared to say ; but it is probably on the ground that this was not
intended as a public exposition, but as a private and confidential
communication to his fellow-bishops. Translator. ]

f "I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not."

100 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

(as may be gathered from tlie discourses of the Lord)
was almost always meant trust or confidena I
showed that, in the passage cited, the word had this
sense and no other, holding to the rale that the cus-
tomary meaning of a word is to be retained, unless
the context requires a different one — and in the pres-
ent case the context favors the usual meaning. The
most reverend archbishop said— perhaps not meas-
uring the force of his words- that this assertion of
mine smacked of the Calvinistie heresy ; in proof of
which he adduced John 11 : 27, the words in which
Martha professes her belief in Christ, which we arc
compelled to understand concerning faith in the

Catholic sense of the word.

But the excellent bishop did not notice that in
my Observation the question was not how to define
the true nature of gracious faith as a "theological
virtue," but only as to the force of the woi&fatih in
its customary usage in the discourses of Christ. Out
of twenty-nine passages in the gospels in which this
word occurs, (which may be easily seen by consult-
ing the concordance of the Lathi Bible,) there are
only two— Matt. 23 : 23,* and Luke 18 : 8t— in which
the word faith can possibly be taken in the sense of
the theological virtue of faith. All the other passa-
ges give the meaning of trust or confidence, ot faith of
miracles. In Luke 22 : 32,J which is the passage in

* . . . " The weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy,
and faith. "

t "When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the
earth?"

t "I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not."

SPEECH OF AECHBISHOP KENRICK. 101

question, this seemed, and still seems, to me to be
proved to be the true meaning, both by the custo-
mary usage of the word and by the context. And
the most reverend archbishop has brought forward
nothing in disproof of this statement.* •

II. I now proceed to show that the archbishop
of Dublin, by his course of reasoning, has emptied
the words, " Thou art Peter," etc., of all the force
which theologians have commonly thought them to
contain. He denies that the bishops, as successors
of the apostles, have that universal jurisdiction in
the church which the apostles received from Christ ;
which indeed is true if we speak of the individual

[* It is pretty clear that Archbishop Cullen took the measure
of his words more accurately than Archbishop Keurick gives him
credit for. On the one hand, Kenrick is unmistakably and un-
answerably right in the definition he gives of the "Word faith as used
in the gospels. On the other hand, his antagonist is right in
declaring that this definition smacks of Protestantism. For the
authorized Roman-catholic definition of faith is the intellectual
assent to certain dogmas as revealed. Now when Archbishop Ken-
rick shows that the faith to which our Lord Jesus Christ promised
eternal life is not that act which the Roman church exacts as the
condition of salvation, but is really that act of committing oneself
in trust and confidence to the Saviour, which is set forth by evangel-
ical preachers as the way of salvation, he does certainly pull out
one of the foundation stones on which the whole fabric of the
Romish system is built.

It is hardly possible to overrate the importance of this point.
It is a cardinal point in the whole controversy. Grant the Romish
definition of faith, and the Romish doctrine of justification easily
follows ; for the mere intellectual receiving of dogmas does of itself
neither justify nor sanctify. Grant this definition, and the fig-
ment of an infallible tribunal of dogma, constantly sitting and
emitting decrees, is necessitated. On the other hand, if the gos-
pel definition of faith, as stated by Dr. Kenrick, is admitted, the
gospel system of truth naturally follows. Tkanslatok. ]

102 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

bishops outside of a general council, but is not true
if understood of the body of bishops, whether in
council or not. If (he power given to the apostles,
of preaching the gospel in the whole earth, is to be
restricted to themselves, although it was given by
Christ to continue "to the end of the world," it is
impossible to prove that the privilege, whatever it
may have been, conferred upon Peter in the words,
" Thou art Peter," etc., descended to his successors,
the popes. The argument, therefore, derived from
these words in Matthew 16:18, 19, falls to the
ground from the fact that the words of Christ in
the 28th chapter, verses 18, 20, of the same evan-
gelist, receive a less literal interpretation; for the
question, in both passages, is on the power be-
longing to the sacred ministry, and not on any sign
of their divine mission, such as working miracles,
speaking with tongues, or some other such gift.
Either, then, the whole of this power of the ministry
passed to their successors, or none of it ; and surely
this last cannot be said. I have not, therefore, in-
fringed upon the proof of the primacy from the words,
"Thou art Peter," etc.; on the contrary, I have
explicitly acknowledged that proof. But the arch-
bishop, by denying that the universal jurisdiction
granted to the apostles has descended to their suc-
cessors, has done that very thing himself.

I thus prove that all the ministerial privileges
granted, whether to Peter or to the rest of the apos-
tles, have descended to their successors ; making no
inquiry at present what was the nature of these priv-

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENEICK. 103

ileges, or by what sort of evidence they are proved
to have been conferred.

Whatever belongs to the sacred ministry in the
church of Christ by the institution of its Founder,
must belong to it always ; otherwise the church would
not be such as he instituted it. Therefore those
privileges granted to the apostles which concern the
function committed to them, are the same now as
when they were first conferred. This is equally true
of those which were given to all, including Peter, and
of that which was granted to Peter individually. On
the day of the resurrection, Christ gave commission
to all the apostles, always including Peter, in the
words, *'As the Father hath sent me, even so send I
you," John 20 : 21 ; and afterwards, when he was
abcut to ascend into heaven, in the words, " Go,
teach all nations," etc., Matt. 28 : 19, 20. But these
words, addressed to all, concern them, not as if spo-
ken to them individually, but to them, as constituting
:i sort of college of apostles; which is clear from
the fact that Thomas, though absent when Christ
appeared to the apostles on the resurrection day,
received (as all admit) the same commission and the
same power of remitting sins as the rest. This
apostolic college is constituted a moral person, which
is to continue to the end of the world ; whose iden-
tity is no more diminished by the perpetual succes-
sion of its members, than our personal identity is
affected by the constant change of the elements that
compose our "bodies. Thus it stands ever before
men a living eye-and-ear witness of those things

104 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

which Christ did and taught; so that it may always
use the words of John, (1st epistle, 1 : 3,) " What we
have seen and heard declare we unto von/' What-
ever power, then, it had at its origin it has now:
divine commission (" as the Father hath sent me ")
and universal jurisdiction ("Go, teach all nations")
must be acknowledged to belong now to the apostol-
ic college. And if this be denied or even weakened,
the whole Christian religion falls to the ground.

From which I infer that the successors of Peter
and the rest of the apostles, constituting the apos-
tolic college, have every power now which they bad
when the college was first instituted by Christ The
individual bishops, taken singly, receive, by the
ordinances of the college itself, only an ordinary
local jurisdiction in their several dioceses. But the
bishops, taken universally, have a universal jurisdic-
tion; not in that sense exactly that the universal
jurisdiction is made up by the sum of the local juris-
dictions ; but that the bishops universally, whether
dispersed and separated from each other, or united
in a general council, constitute the apostolic college.
Hence the words of Cyprian, " There is one episco-
pate, an undivided part of which is held by every
bishop,"" receive light and a ready explanation. If
the most reverend archbishop of Dublin is not pre-
pared to admit all this, at least he must confess that
the several bishops united in General Council have

[* "Episcopatus tmus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars
tenetur." The phrase is one often quoted from the treatise Ik
Unit. Ec.cl, and much disputed as to its rendering. Tr.1

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENUICK. 105

universal jurisdiction. This jurisdiction the illustri-
ous archbishop of Nisibis,* at the end of the second
volume of the French translation of his History of
General Councils, tries to show is derived by the
bishops directly from the Holy Ghost, by virtue of
their consecration, while he refers their local juris-
diction to the Roman pontiff. But the school of
theologians to which I adhere considers all episcopal
jurisdiction to be held by the bishops by immediate
derivation from Christ, but that the ordinary local
restriction of it had no other origin than the ordi-
nance of the church, in due subordination, neverthe-
less, to the Koman pontiff as the head alike of the
apostolic college and of the universal church. I say,
therefore, that the words of Christ spoken to the
apostles lose none of their force to the successors of
the apostles ; and in this I lay down nothing which
tends to weaken the argument which theologians are
accustomed to deduce from Matt. 16 : 18, in proof of
the primacy of the Koman pontiff. This argument I
now proceed to examine.

III. I beg you so far to indulge me, most emi-
nent and reverend fathers, as to give me your calm
attention while I say things which doubtless will not
be agreeable to many of you. I am not about to
set forth anything heretical or savoring of heresy,
(as the remarks of the archbishop of Dublin may
have led you to fear,) nor anything opposed to the
principles of the faith, nor anything but what, so
far as my slender abilities permit, I shall endeavor

[ * Cardoni, one of the pope's theologians. ]

lOo THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to sustain with solid argument. One thing I wish
to give warning of: I speak for myself only, not for
others; and I do not know but that what I am about
to say may give dissatisfaction even to those with
whom I take sides in the discussion of this question.
If, in the course of my speech, I happen to speak
too sharply on any point, remember and imitate the
example of those leaders who were persuaded to
patience by the famous saying, "Strike, but hear."
I shall pav due respect to Their Eminences the mod-
erators o( the congregation; but I will not be pat
down by commotions.*

The primacy of the Roman pontiff, both in honor
and in jurisdiction, in the universal church, 1 ac-
knowledge. Primacy, I say, not lordship. Bat that
the primacy is vested in him as the successor of Pe-
ter, all the tradition of the church testifies, from the
beginning. And on the sole strength of this testi-
mony I accept it as an absolutely certain principle
and dogma of faith. But that it can be proved from
the words of Holy Scripture, by any one who would
be faithful to the rule of interpretation prescribed to
us in that profession of faith which Ave have uttered
at the opening of this Council,! and so often on

[* Motibus aidem non cedam. The fact that the writer, prepar-
ing his speech in advance, should deem it needful to announce this
determination, suggests obvious inferences concerning the charac-
ter of the sessions of the Council, and calls for explanation from
Archbishop Manning. ]

[f The "Creed of Pius IV." (see above, p. 73, note) declares:
"I will never take nor interpret the Holy Scripture except in
accordance with the unanimous consent of the fathers." Arch-
bishop Kenrick goes on to say, with truth, that there never is any

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 107

other occasions, I deny. It is true that, following
the principles of exegesis, I held the opposite view
when I was writing the Observations which the arch-
bishop of Dublin has attacked so sharply. But on
a closer study of the subject, I judge that this inter-
pretation must be abandoned. My reason for this
change of opinion is the following :

The rule of Biblical interpretation imposed upon
us is this : that the Scriptures are not to be interpret-
ed contrary to the unanimous consent of the fathers.
It is doubtful whether any instance of that unanimous
consent is to be found. But this failing, the rule
seems to lay down for us the law of following, in
their interpretation of Scripture, the major number
of the fathers, that might seem to approach unanim-
ity. Accepting this rule, we are compelled to aban-
don the usual modern exposition of the words, " On
this rock will I build my church."

In a remarkable pamphlet " printed in facsimile
of manuscript," and presented to the fathers almost
two months ago, we find five different interpretations
of the word rock, in the place cited; "the first of
which declares" (I transcribe the words) "that the
church was built on Peter : ' and this interpretation
is followed by seventeen fathers — among them, by
Origen, Cyprian, Jerome, Hilary, Cyril of Alexandria,
Leo the Great, Augustine.

"The second interpretation understands from

such unanimous consent. Literally, then, the creed is a vow not
to receive nor interpret the Scriptures at all — in which sense, there
is no doubt that it is sometimes fulfilled with great faithfulness
an 1 consistency. ]

108 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

these words, ' On this rock will I build my church/
that the church was built on all the apostles, whom
Peter represented by virtue of the primacy. And
this opinion is followed by eight fathers — among
them, Origen, Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, Theo-
doret.

" The third interpretation asserts that the words,
'On this rock/ etc., are to be understood of the
faith which Peter had professed— that this faith, this
profession of faith, by which we believe Christ to be
the Son of the living God, is the everlasting and im-
movable foundation of the church. This interpreta-
tion is the weightiest of all, since it is followed by
forty-four fathers and doctors; among them, from
the East, are Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria,
Chrysostom, Theophylact; from the West, Hilary,
Ambrose, Leo the Great ; from Africa, Augustine.

"The fourth interpretation declares that the
words, ' On this rock/ etc., are to be understood of
that rock which Peter had confessed, that is, Christ —
that the church was built upon Christ. This inter-
pretation is followed by sijctcot fathers and doctors.

" The fifth interpretation of the fathers under-
stands by the name of the rock, the faithful them-
selves, who, believing Christ to be the Son of God,
are constituted living stones out of which the church
is built."

Thus far the author of the pamphlet aforesaid,
in which may be read the words of the fathers and
doctors whom he cites.

From this it follows, either that no argument at

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 109

all, or one of the slenderest probability, is to be de-
rived from the words, " On this rock will I build my
church," in support of the primacy. Unless it is
certain that by the rock is to be understood the apos-
tle Peter in his own person, and not in his capacity
as the chief apostle speaking for them all, the word
supplies no argument whatever, I do not say in proof
of papal infallibility, but even in support of the pri-
macy of the bishop of Kome. If we are bound to
follow the majority of the fathers in this thing, then
we are bound to hold for certain that by the rock
should be understood the faith professed by Peter,
not Peter professing the faith. And here I must be
allowed to bring forward a signal example of a less
ingenuous interpretation, presented in the little vol-
ume lately published here at Kome, by an excep-
tional privilege, by the reverend archbishop of Edes-
sa, which, by the leave of that venerable man, I
wish to speak of ; for in a matter of this importance
we are bound to use the plainest words, if they are
but true. The book is commended by a squad of
eleven eminent theologians under the command of
the learned Father Perrone, to the supreme pontiff,
by whose permission, doubtless, it is excepted from
the rule which prevents the bishops from communi-
cating their views to each other through the press,
unless they are willing to get the use of the press
somewhere else than in Home.

The two principal interpretations, which under-
stand by the rock Peter, and Peter's faith, having
been cited, and the observation being made that the

110 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

former was common before the Arian heresy, but
that the other gained ground afterwards on account
of the rise of the controversy on the divinity of
Christ, the most reverend author proceeds -with Ids
lucubration in the following words, pp. 7 and 8 :

"But it will be obvious to any one who will take
the following things into consideration, how mutually
consistent are both these expositions of the gospel
text. For the establishment and preservation of
unity, Christ sets the person of Peter and his succes-
sors in the primacy, as the centre, that all believers
might be conjoined at once in unity of faith and of
fellowship. But since unity consists not only in the
fellowship of all belieyers, but especially in the one-
ness of faith, which is greater than fellowship, it was
absolutely necessaiy both that the foundation of the
ecclesiastical structure should be laid, and that the
centre of unity should be established, not in the
mere person of Peter, but also in the faith which he
preached. For if the foundation of the church were
laid only in the person of Peter, and not also in the
solidity of his faith, then, the faith of Peter failing,
the unity of the church would be lost, and a plural-
ity of churches would be formed upon the variation
in the profession of faith. If therefore Christ wished
the church to be one, in the unity of faith and fel-
lowship ; if, in order to the perpetual preservation of
this unity, he set the person of Peter in the relation
of foundation and centre, it behooved him also to set
Peter's most solid faith, which he professed and
preached, as the foundation ; otherwise he would not

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. Ill

have attained the end wliich lie had set before
himself in establishing the church. Wherefore,
since both Peter's person and the faith which he
preached are the foundation of the church, it is clear
that that same rock-like firmness which is the glory
of Peter's person is also to be ascribed to his faith,
lest, without it, the whole building should tumble.
Therefore both expositions of these words of Christ
are happily in accordance with his intention in found-
ing the church, and one of them serves to throw light
on the other. Therefore the fathers of the earlier
centuries, applying these words to the person of Pe-
ter, not only do not exclude the second interpreta-
tion, but by implication presume it ; for, admitting
the person of Peter to be the immovable foundation-
rock of the whole structure of the church, they are
bound by implication to admit at the same time his
faith also as standing in the same relation of founda-^
tion; since identity of faith is the foundation of the
unity of the whole building. On the other hand,
they who hold that Peter's faith is the rock laid by
Christ for the foundation of the church, do not ex-
clude Peter's person, but only teach more explicitly
in what way Peter is to be understood as the reck
and foundation of the church. Hence there are
several of them who give both expositions, as may
be seen in St. Augustine."

To say nothing of the fact that the author takes
for granted, in these observations, the thing in ques-
tion, namely, that Christ founded his church on Pe-
ter's personal faith, and that a consequence of this

112 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

is the infallibility of Peter's successors, I remark
only on one point. Out of the passages of the fathers
which he quotes through six or seven pages, there
are many which are capable of being understood
either of Peter professing his faith, that is, of Peter's
subjective faith, or of the faith professed by Peter,
that is, of Peter's -faith taken objectively. But to
make his argument good for anything, the author
had to prove that the fathers cited by him spoke of
the subjective and not the objective faith of Peter —
which he has quite neglected to do.

It seems to me, after some thought upon the
diversity of interpretations, that they may all be
resolved into one, by taking into consideration the
distinction between the foundation on which a house
is built, and the foundation which is laid in the build-
ing of it. The builder of a house, especially if it is
to be a great house, and to stand a long time, begins
with digging down until he comes, as the phrase
goes, "to the live rock;" and on this he lays the
foundations, that is, the first course of the building.
If we admit this double meaning of foundation, all
the diversity of interpretations disappears ; and many
passages of Scripture, which at first might seem dif-
ficult to reconcile with each other, receive great light.
The natural and primary foundation, so to speak, of
the church, is Christ, whether we consider his per-
son, or faith in his divine nature. The architectural
foundation, that laid by Christ, is the twelve apostles,
among whom Peter is eminent by virtue of the pri-
macy. In this way we reconcile those passages of

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENIilCK. 113

the fathers, which understand him on this occasion,
(as in the instance related in John 6, after the dis-
course of Christ in the synagogue of Capernaum,) to
have answered in the name of all the apostles, to a
question addressed to them all in common ; and in
behalf of all to have received the reward of con-
fession.*

In this explanation of the word rod; the primacy
of Peter is guarded, as the primary ministerial foun-
dation; and the fitness of the words of Paul and
John is guarded, when they call all the apostles by
the common title of the foundation ; and the truth
of the expression used with such emphasis by Paul,
is guarded : " Other foundation can no man lay than
that is laid, even Christ Jesus," 1 Cor. 3:2; and the
adversaries of the faith are disarmed of the weapon
which they have so effectively wielded against us,
when they say that the Catholics believe the church
to be built, not on Christ, but on a mortal man ; and
(a matter of no small account in the present discus-
sion) the underpinning is taken out from the argu-
ment which the advocates of the infallibility of the
pope by himself alone are wont to derive from a
figurative expression of doubtful meaning — riding
the metaphor to death — to prove that he received
from Christ an authority not only supreme, but ab-
solute. But whatever may be thought of this opin-
ion of mine, it is obviously impossible to deduce from

* S. Hieeonymus, in Matt. 16 : 15, 10. S. Augustinus, Enarr.
in Psa. 108, n. 1. Idem, in Joannis Evangelium, 118, n. 4. S. Am-
brosius, in Psa. 38 : 37.

114 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the words, "Thou art Peter," etc., a peremptory
argument in proof even of the primacy.*

As to the other words of Christ to Peter, "Feed
my lambs," and " Feed my sheep," it may be said
that by that threefold commission Christ showed
that Peter had not fallen, by liis threefold denial,
from the privilege by which lie had been called to
partnership with the apostles; and that this was
continued to him in reward for the greater love he
bore towards his Lord above the rest. As August ine
says, "The triple confession answers to the triple
denial, so that his tongue might give no less service
to his love than to his fear, and so that impending
death should not seem to have drawn out more from
him than present life."* The argument adduced by
Bellarmine, that the words "my sheep"' and "my
kimbs" include the whole flock of Christ, and there-
fore show that the power conferred by them extends
to all, proves nothing at all. For they are no more
general, nor do they any more express the idea of
government, than those which Paul addressed to the
elders at Miletus collectively : " Take heed to your-
selves and to aV theflock\ over which the Holy Ghost
hath made you bishops, to rulej (Troiuaimv) the church

* After the above had been sent to the printer, I happened on
n passage in Paschasius Radbert, which expresses the same idea in
advance of me: "Licet super eodem fundamento primus ac si ca-
put Petrus recte positus credatur, tamen in ea petra de qua nome.i
sibi ex dono traxit, et super earn tota construitur, et constabilitu;
ilia ccelestis Jerusalem, id est, super Christum, ut linn a permane.it
in asternuni." Expos, in Matt., lib. 8, ch. 16.

f In Joann. E vang. , ch. 123, n. 5.

X Vulgate, Universo gregi. § Vuhjate, Regere.

SPEECH OF AKCHBISHOP KENRICK. 115

of God which he hath purchased with his own blood."
Acts 20 : 28 *

That the words, " I have prayed for thee," etc.,
do not have the sense commonly attributed to them,
but are to be understood of Peter's fall at the time
of the passion, and his subsequent conversion, I
have tried to show in my Observations. t " This in-

* See S. Basil., Constit. Monastic, ch. 22, n. 5. S. Augustin.,
De Agone Christ iano, ch. 30.

f The following is an extract from the Observations alluded to:
• ' Neither is there any more value as a proof of papal inerran-
cy in those words of Christ to Peter (Luke 22 : 31, 32) in which
the advocates of this opinion think to find their main argument.
Considering the connection in which Christ uttered them, and the
words which he proceeded to address to all the apostles, it does
not appear that any gift pertaining to the government of the
church was then granted or promised to Peter, much less that the
gift of inerrancy in the government of it was declared to him. It
was a warning by which the Lord exhorted him to overcome the
impending temptation to which he was going to be exposed, and
at the same time an intimation that after his fall he should be con-
verted and strengthen the rest of the apostles. Christ prayed
therefore for Peter, who, as he was distinguished above the other
apostles in his work, was sought above the rest to be sifted by Sa-
tan, and was foreseen to be above the rest liable to lapse. Christ
prayed for him that his faith might not fail —that is, that he might
not wholly or for ever lose that trust by which thus far he had
clung to Christ ; and that after his fall, coming to himself again,
that is, being converted, he should add courage to the rest. This
Peter did after the Lord's resurrection, when he announced the
fact to the other disciples, as appears from the words, ' The Lord
is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Peter.' Luke 24:«3i. The
words of Christ, then, are to be understood, not of faith as a body
of doctrine, in which sense it is never used by the Lord ; nor yet
of faith, the theological virtue by which we believe in God, in
which sense it occurs in his discourses no more than once or twice,
but of that trust by which, thus far, he had clung to him as a
Master. And if a few of the early intei-preters, and the crowd of
the moderns, have understood these words differently, and have
found them to contain the conferring upon Peter of the office of

116 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

terpretation," says the author of the pamphlet printed
in facsimile, "is one of great reputation and author-
ity, given by forty-four fathers and doctors both of the
most ancient and of later times." For so the words
were understood through the first six centuries of the
church. The fact that they afterwards received an-
other meaning, seems to have grown out of the com-
mon usage of ecclesiastical writers, of interpreting
the words of Scripture in an accommodated sense
instead of the literal sen

In addition to the remarks on this subject is my
Observations, I take pleasure in adding some tilings
which seem to confirm my view of the meaning of'
Christ's words. From the fact that the Saviour,
after speaking to all the apostles and informing them
that Satan had sought them, to sift them as wheat,
turns then to Peter with the words, "I have prayed
for tltee" — which must necessarily be understood of
him alone, to the exclusion of the rest, since, after
being converted, he was to strengthen the others — it
is inferred that some peculiar thing was promised to
Peter in these words. In fact this is true, but some-
thing considerably different from the extraordinary
gift commonly understood to have been promised to
Peter in them.

Can it be said that Christ prayed for Peter alone,
but that he provided no safeguard for the others,
about to encounter so great a peril ? How then does

confirming in the faith his brethren, that is, the rest of the apos-
tles and their successors the bishops, this does not impose upon
other people any necessity of abandoning the simple and literal
meaning. "

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 117

it come to pass that the others stood firm, unsus-
tained by any extraordinary assistance, while Peter,
for whom singly Christ prayed, so grievously fell?
The true reason why the Saviour addressed the words
to him alone seems to be this : He prayed indeed for
all, as we cannot but take for granted. But to Peter
he intimated, by directing his words exclusively to
him, (just as, after Peter's answer in verse 33, he
proceeded to say it more plainly in verse 34,) that
he would deny his Master. Thus he warned him of
his approaching fall, and foretold his conversion, and
that by him the rest were to be confirmed. The
Lord's words so understood give a clear sense. Be-
side the repeated warning given to Peter, they con-
tain the prophecy of his conversion; so that when
Peter, having come to himself, clearly recollected it,
it left no doubt in his* mind of the pardon which he
should obtain, and thus saved him, it may be, from
despair in view of his most grievous sin.

Besides, the successive words addressed by
Christ to Peter cannot be understood of his succes-
sors without involving an extraordinary absurdity.
The words, ""When thou art converted," certainly re-
fer to Peter's conversion. If the foregoing words, " I
have prayed for thee," and the following, " Strength-
en thy brethren," prove that the Divine assistance
and the office have descended to his successors, it
does not appear why the intermediate words, " when
thou art converted," should not belong to them too,
and in some sense be understood of them.*

[* There is an extremely telling stroke of covert sarcasm here,

118 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

In saying these things, I am not greatly affected
by the accusation lately levied against me, without
mentioning my name, by the right reverend bishop
of Elphin (treading in tin* footsteps of the archbishop
of Dublin) when he gave vent to his grief of heart
that there should be any among the bishops who
would not scrapie to take the texts of Holy Scripture
and other citations in proof of papal infallibility, and
interpret them in the sense accepted by heretics!
"If these things," said that excellent man, "are
done in the green tree, what shall be done in the
dry?" My answer to him and to others is this:
Following the example of Iremens, Tertnllian, Au-
gustine, and Vincent of Leans, 1 believe that the
proofs of the Catholic faith are to be sought rather hi
tradition than in the interpretation of the Scriptures.*
" Interpretation of Scripture, '* says Tertullian, " is
better adapted to befog the truth than to demon-
strate it." Of the testimonies derived from tradition,
there are some which, I think, will have to be given
up ; as in the phrase of Iremcus on the superior
authority which he is commonly thought to have

as well as a substantial argument. It is more than implied that if
the words impute to the popes Peter's commission and Peter's
grant of divine grace, they must impute to them also Peter's con-
version and therefore Peter's apostasy. It was quite unnecessary
for the author to do more than suggest to his intended audience, that
the popes might perhaps succeed better in vindicating their succes-
sion to Peter by the signs of apostasy than by the signs of grace. ]
[* This frank and unreserved acknowledgment would perhaps
hardly have been made in a document intended for the promiscu-
ous public. But it is sustained by weighty authorities in Roman
theology. Some of these may be found cited by Lord Acton,
p. 101]

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENEICK. I1D

claimed for the Roman church. But I have taken
the responsibility of this concession, alleging sub-
stantial reasons, which ought to be met, not with
abuse, but with other reasons.

It has seemed to me that nice refinements upon
figures of speech had better be laid aside ; but I
have appealed to the faith of the Councils and the
fathers, which shows that such subtleties do not
agree with the ancient doctrine and practice of the
church universal, but rather contradict them. This
method of reasoning is better fitted for bringing
back Protestants into the bosom of the church, than
arguments the very principles of which they reject ;
and which, although they may seem impregnable to
less intelligent Catholics, nevertheless are proved by
the experience of the last three centuries to be ill
adapted for putting an end to controversies.

I close this part of my speech with a brief sum-
ming up of the argument :

We have in the Holy Scriptures perfectly clear
testimonies of a commission given to all the apostles,
and of the divine assistance promised to all. These
passages are clear, and admit no variation of mean-
ing. "We have not even one single passage of Scrip-
ture, the meaning of which is undisputed, in which
anything of the kind is promised to Peter separately
from the rest. And yet the authors of the schema
want us to assert that to the Koman pontiff as Pe-
ter's successor is given that power which cannot be
proved by any clear evidence of holy Scripture to
have been given to Peter himself except just so far

120 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

as he received it in common with the other apostlt s;
and which being claimed for him separately from the
rest, it would follow that the divine assistance prom-
ised to them was to be communicated only through
him, although it is clear from the passages cited that
it was promised to him only in the same manner
and in the same terms as to all the others. I admit
indeed, that a great privilege was granted to Peter
above the rest; but I am led to this conviction by
the testimony, not of the Scriptures, but of all Chris-
tian antiquity. By the help of this testimony it
appears that he is infallible; but on this condition,
that he should use the counsel of his brethren, and
should lie aided by the judgment of those who are
his partners in this supreme function, and should
speak in their name, of whom he is head and mouth.
And yet there is no one but sees how far tins privi-
lege falls short of the desires of those who, not with-
out abuse of their opponents that stand in the old
paths of the church, desire that the papal power,
great by its divine origin, and since that, in the
course of ages, enormously augmented, should be
the sole power in the church.''

* In his Letter to the Archbishop of Paris, dated October 24,
1865, the pope claims for himself the ordinary power in the partic-
ular dioceses. In the schema De Romano Pontlfice it is said that
he has ordinary and immediate jurisdiction in the universal
church. Since this is said without making any distinction be-
tween ordinary or episcopal power and ordinary patriarchal or
primatial power, it would seem to follow that the pope is actually
ordinary or bishop of each several diocese of the Christian world.
According to the author of the book On the Roman Curia, who
lived at Rome for fifteen years, the pope is the exclusive ordinary
of all the missions under the sacred congregation de Propaganda

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENBIOK. 121

IV. At the opening of his speech, the archbishop
of Dublin spoke in terms of the highest praise of
an English work by my late brother archbishop of
Baltimore, on "The Primacy of the Apostolic See;"
for which I made due acknowledgments. But in the
course of his speech it appeared to me that his com-
memoration of the dead was a reproach to the liv-
ing ; for he related how that thirty }Tears ago, more
or less, he learned by the reading of it, that the do-
ings of the Sixth Council in the condemnation of
Honorius were nowise opposed to the notion of pa-
pal infallibility. The most reverend the present arch-
bishop of Baltimore afterwards made honorable men-
tion of him, and quoted somewhat from his dog-
matic theology, from which it might appear that
there was no difference between the opinion which
he himself so stoutly defends, and that which, in my
letter to him, I asserted to have been my brother's

Fide, so that there is no difference between vicars apostolic and
the titular bishops set over those missions, except that the latter
are ordinary and the former extraordinary vicars of the pope. Die
Romische Curie. Bangen. Munster, 1854. Page 2G3. After the
Concordats have been done away, which will not be long after the
infallibility of the pope is established, all episcopal sees will be
at the disposal of the pope alone, ad nutum ; and thenceforth all
bishops will be vicars of the pope, liable to be removed at his
nod— ad nutum ejus. Thus the church, from which civil society
borrowed the form of representative government to which it owes
the rights it has acquired, will exhibit an example of absolutism,
both in doctrine and administration, carried to the highest pitch.
A right reverend orator said, no long time since, that the papal
power is, in government, absolute indeed, but not arbitrary ; be-
cause it is always guided by reason — which evidently implies that
the pope is impeccable. In fact, this is necessarily inferred from
his infallibility ; for infallibility is a quality of the intellect, and
the intellect is affected by the character.

Vatican Council. (3

122 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

opinion. I have a few things to say of each of these
bishops.

I might prefer a serious complaint against the
archbishop of Baltimore for having presented in a
garbled and mutilated form, from this rostrum, the
passage which has lately so often been brought be-
fore the public. My brother's complete sentence is
as follows:

" On the other hand, that way of speaking is not
to be approved, according to which the pope is de-
clared to be infallible of himself alone; for scarcely
any Catholic theologian is known to have claimed
for him as a private teacher the privilege of iner-
rancy. Neither as pope is lie alone, since to him
teaching, the college of bishops <j;ives its adhesion,
which, it is plain, has always happened."

Thus far the archbishop of Baltimore quotes.
The words immediately following on these he thinks
best to omit, although, as will at once be manifest,
they are absolutely necessary to the full expression
of the writer's meaning :

" But no orthodox writer would deny that pontifi-
cal definitions accepted by the college of bishops,
whether in council or in their sees, either by sub-
scribing decrees, or by offering no objection to them,
have full force and infallible authority."

These words leave no doubt of the mind of the
writer. Hereafter they should not be omitted when
the previous sentence is quoted, lest a false impres-
sion of his sentiments be conveyed.

It is clear that this is no chance utterance of his

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 123

opinion, from what he says in that English work of
his from the reading of which his eminence the arch-
bishop of Dublin testified that he had derived such
great profit. I read from the work itself belonging
to the library of the English college in this city. I
give a closely literal Latin version, lest I weaken the
force of it by being ambitious of elegance :

[The extract, as it here follows, is from the original Eng-
lish.]

" The personal fallibility [of the pope] in his pri-
vate capacity, writing or speaking, is freely conceded
by the most ardent advocates of papal prerogatives ;
but his official infallibility ex cathedra is strongly
affirmed by many :* while some, as the French As-
sembly of 1682, contend that his judgment may ad-
mit of amendment, as long as it is not sustained by
the assent and adhesion of the great body of bish-
ops. Practically there is no room for difficulty,
since all solemn judgments hitherto pronounced by
the pontiff have received the assent of his colleagues ;
and in the contingency of a new definition it should
be presumed by the faithful at large that it is' cor-
rect, AS LONG AS THE BODY OF BISHOPS DO NOT REMON-
STRATE OR OPPOSE IT."f

V. Before proceeding to other points, I feel
bound to say that I do not agree in all respects with
my brother's opinion, which, I am aware, is the com-
mon opinion of theologians. The assent of the church

[* In a foot-note, the writer here presses additional charges of
misquotation, which it seems unnecessary to reproduce here. ]

f Kenrick. Primacy of the Apostolic See, Philadelphia, 1845,
p. 357,

124 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

dispersed, as the phrase is, I consider to ha
negative rather than a positive authority. The
church, whether dispersed or assembled in Council,
can not assent to any error that contradicts revealed
truth ; otherwise, the gates of hell might be said to
have prevailed against it. Nevertheless it has the
divine assistance, in those things alone which were
taught by Christ to the apostles, all which things —
that is, all revealed truth — " all things whatsoever
I have told you" — the Holy Spirit brought to their
recollection by illuminating their minds with his own
divine light (for this is the end to which he
rather than by revealing new things. In order that
the apostles and their successors may bear testimony
of these things as ear-witnesses, it is necessary that
they should be unable to approve, even by silence, of
any opinion contradictory to them.

But when the question is on a new definition of
faith, I consider that a Council which truly repre-
sents the church universal is of necessity required.
For it is there alone that inquiry can be made, in
case any doubt should arise. In certain matters
only, and in these only under favorable circum-
stances, may silence be taken for assent ; but not in
all matters, especially when dissent might turn out
to be either useless or perilous. Take the present
controversy, for example. If the pope had thought
fit to define himself as infallible in the sense of the?
schema, there would have been no opportunity given
for the great investigation which we have seen insti-
tuted, now that the Council is convened and the

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 125

bishops assembled, affording light and courage to
each other. Yery few of those who have stood out
so stoutly against the new definition, in the most
difficult circumstances, would have ventured to resist
the pope, or, if they had had the courage for that,
would have known where to lay their hands on
weapons fit and effective for the protection of their
rights, so gravely imperilled.

A signal instance in proof that the silence of the
church is not, at least in all cases, to be taken for
consent, is supplied by the history of the opinion
concerning the power of the Roman pontiff against
realms not subject to his government. For four cen-
turies after the bull Unam Sandam* this opinion
prevailed. I am not aware that any document is
extant which shows that there was any remonstrance
against it except on the part of persons who suffered
some damage from it ; and these must be considered
as having demurred not so much to the power as to
the exercise of it to their injur}r. From the fulmina-
tion of the bull of Boniface VIII., down to the
beginning of the seventeenth century — for four whole
centuries — this definition of the papal power seems
to have been in force, and was said even by the most
learned theologians of the seventeenth century to be
matter of faith. I once used to think that the lan-
guage of the bull Unam Sandam was capable of
being reconciled with the view I then held of papal
infallibility. But I do not now think so. It used to
seem to me a special act of divine providence which

[* Fulminated a. d. 1302.]

12G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

had kept the pope from declaring all mankind to be
subject to him in temporals, by reason of sin ; but on
more mature reflection I saw that this explanation
was a mere subterfuge, utterly unworthy of an
honest man. "Words derive their meaning from
the intent of the speaker and the acceptation of the
hearers. No man can deny that the purpose of
Boniface in that bull was to claim for himself tem-
poral power, and to propound this opinion to the
faithful, to be held under pain of damnation. No
man can deny that the words of the bull were
received in this sense by all then living. If it was
withstood by the subjects of Philip the Fair, these
were extremely few in number compared to the whole
of Christendom, for it was only a little part of modern
France that was under his sceptre, and these few
may be considered as having opposed rather the
exercise of the power than its divine right. The
church, then, through all that period seems to have
approved by its assent the bull Unara Sanctum,
hardly a single bishop having objected to it.

But at the present time the opinion so solemnly
enunciated in that bull is repudiated by all, not
excepting even the most ardent -advocates of papal
infallibility. I summon certainly a most unimpeach-
able witness in this case, namely, his grace the most
reverend Martin John Spalding, archbishop of Balti-
more, who, in a work (of which I shall have more
particular occasion to speak hereafter) printed at
Baltimore in 1866, after three other editions of the
same had been exhausted and this fourth edition

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 127

bad been issued to meet tbe demand of tbe faithful,
speaks as follows :

"But tbe papacy invested itself with temporal
power ; and in the middle ages it claimed tbe right
to depose princes, and to absolve their subjects from
the oath of allegiance. Be it so ; what then ? Was
this accession of temporal power ever viewed as an
essential prerogative of the papacy? Or was it not
considered merely as an accidental appendage, the
creature of peculiar circumstances? Are there any
examples of such alleged usurpations during the first
ten centuries of its history? Has this power been
exercised, or even claimed, by the Koman pontiffs
for the last three centuries ? If these two facts are
undoubted — as they certainly are — then how main-
tain that a belief in the papacy involves a recognition
of its temporal power ? The latter was never, cer-
tainly, a doctrine of the church. If it was, where is
the proof ? — where the church definition that made
it a doctrine?" Five leading Catholic universities
(Sorbonne, Louvain, Douay, Alcala, and Salamanca)
when officially called on by Mr. Pitt, prime minister
of Great Britain, (1788,) solemnly and unanimously
disclaimed this opinion and maintained the contrary.
Did the Catholic church, did the popes, ever rebuke
them for the disclaimer ? Do not Catholics all over

* Here the author is certainly mistaken. It does not require
a definition to constitute a doctrine. It is enough that there
should be truth divinely revealed, and propounded as such to the
faithful by the ordinary magistery of the church. But that power
was propounded as a doctrine by Boniface VIII., when he declared
that it must be held by all "sub salutis dispendio." Furthermore,
Suarez has it for a defined doctrine.

128 THE VATICAN .COUNCIL.

the world now almost unanimously disclaim it ? arid
are they the less Catholic for this? I fearlessly
assert — and I do so advisedly — that there are xw\
few Catholics at the present day who do not reject
this opinion; that there are still fewer who maintain
it; and that it is not defended, at least publicly,'"'
even in Rome itself.!- "

The tacit assent of the bishops, therefore, for no
less than four centuries, did not have the effect to
constitute the opinion of the power of the popes in
temporals into a doctrine of the Catholic faith, which
is obvious of itself, since otherwise the rejection of it
now would be equivalent to defection from the unity
of the Catholic church.

In this opinion two things are to be distinguished :
the power itself, and the reason of the power. The
power itself lmd its ground in circumstances; and
for the most part it tended to the public good. The
reason of the power was not, as the popes asserted,
divine authority, divinely granted to them as holding
the primacy in the church ; but it originated in cir-
cumstances, by the consent of Christendom. It was
recognized by public law, and was, so far, legitimate.
It was vested in the popes, not because as popes
they had received it from Christ, but because there
was no one else who could exercise it at that time,
when the need for it arose. In ascribing it to the
ordinance of God, the popes were laboring under

* The expression is too incautious.

f Lectures on the Evidences of Catholicity. By ft£ J. Spald-
ing, D. D. , Archbishop of Baltimore. Fourth edition, 1866, pp.
377, 378.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENBJCK. 129

something of human infirmity — a fact with which it
would be unjust to reproach them. That it has now
fallen into desuetude is admitted by all. Few per-
sons think of it as a thing possible to be revived ;
although this may not be impossible, if the pope is
to be held infallible, and if we may put confidence in
the words of the most reverend archbishop of West-
minster, in a speech delivered by him at London some
years ago, before his promotion to the episcopate.

This distinguished man asserted in that speech —
if I remember correctly what I read in the newspa-
pers, and I certainly am not mistaken as to the
substance of it — that the pope, as Christ's vicege-
rent, ought to be a king ; and that the fact of his
having been for centuries without secular dominion
was no argument against this assertion, for he had
always possessed the right to it. If this is true,
(which I vehemently deny) it follows that the pope
possesses not only the petty domain of his Roman
territory, but a sort of universal right over the whole
world. Since Christ is king of kings, the pope, who
as his representative ought to be a king (according
to the archbishop of Westminster,*) ought to repre-

[* The opinions of Abp. Manning, as the representative and
leader of the now victorious party in the Roman Catholic church,
are of some interest to American citizens. A more recent utter-
ance of his is quoted by Quirinus (p. 832) from a sermon of his in
1869. Speaking in the pope's name, he says : "I claim to be the
supreme judge and director of the consciences of men ; of the
peasant that tills the field, and the prince that sits on the throne ;
of the household that lives in the shade of privacy, and the legis-
lature that makes laws for kingdoms— I am the sole last supreme
judge of what is right and wrong."]

5*

130 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

sent him throughout the whole realm of Christ him-
self : that is, throughout the entire world. We know
what a happy talent for drawing inferences, even out
of figures of speech, is shown by the advocates of
papal authority. What if they have for a premise
so pregnant a principle as this of the archbishop of
Westminster ? It can be no more of an objection to
this right that for a number of centuries it was never
claimed, than that for many centuries from the be-
ginning it was not possessed, and even that no one
dreamed of its belonging to the pope. I rein- to this
not to excite prejudice Against this eminent man, but
in order to show him that the consequence which
necessarily follows from a principle evidently errone-
ous, the falsity of which I shall try to prove in the
course of this speech — a consequence which he him-
self would reject — ought to make him cautious not to
know more than it is worth while to know about
papal infallibility.

For these reasons I am compelled to differ from
what is at least a common way of speaking, when
the question rises about denning some new dogma of
the Catholic faith. It is my opinion that this can
not be done without a Council truly representing the
church universal.

I now return to the subject, with which, after all,
what I have said is by no means disconnected.

VI. There is no great difference, if perchance
there is any, between my brother's opinion and that
expressed by the most reverend Martin John Spal-
ding, archbishop of Baltimore, in his History of the

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENHICK. 131

Reformation ; from the fifth edition of which, revised
by the author and published at Baltimore in 1866, I
quote the following, which I translate into Latin with
the same fidelity as I did my brother's language. I
premise that it had first appeared twenty-six years
before, and that it was originally written in reply to
the History of the Reformation by D'Aubigne. This
book is to be found in the hands of almost all the
Catholics in the United States, not only on account
of the amount of information which it contains and
the familiar style in which it is written, but also on
account of the high esteem in which the author is
held among us, as the occupant of the primatial
see, and as a man of wide celebrity for learning and
genius. This fifth edition appeared in the same year
in which he drew up, in the name of the Council of
Baltimore, a letter to the pope, from which both he
and others would have it inferred that the bishops of
the United States favor the designs of the infallibil-
ists. * It is contained in the library of the American
College in this city, having been presented by the
author, with his name in it in his own handwriting,
in 1867, when he was at Rome ; on which occasion
he, with the other bishops, signed a letter to the
pope, surely with no intention of settling or enunci-
ating a doctrine, but only of manifesting their own
veneration and affection towards the pope. The
archbishop of Baltimore's words are as follows :

" In what, in fact, consists the difference between
the authoritative teaching of the first body of Christ's
ministers, the apostles, and that body of pastors who

132 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

by divine commission succeeded them in the office of
preaching, teaching, and baptizing, and who hi the
discharge of these sacred duties were promised the
divine assistance all days, even to the consummation
of the world? And if the latter was opposed to
rational liberty, why was not the former ? Besides,
we learn, for the first time, that the Eoman Chan-
cery* decided on articles of faith. AVe had always

thought that this was THE EXCLUSIVE PROVINCE OF

General Councils, and when they were not in ses-
sion, of the Eoman pontiffs with the CONSENT OB
ACQUIESCENCE of the body of bishops dibpbbbed over
thi: would. We had also in our simplicity believed
that even these did not always decide on contro-
verted points, but only in cases in which the teaching
of revelation was clear and explicit; and that in
other matters they wisely allowed a reasonable lati-
tude of opinion. But D'Aubigne has taught us
better ! He would have us to believe that Eoman
Catholics are bound hand and foot, body and soul,
and that they are not allowed even to reflect."!'

It remains to say a few words of my brother's

* Perhaps D'Aubigne wrote Curia and the mistake occurred
in the translation. [Abp. Kenrick's note.]

t History of the Reformation by Martin John Spalding, Arch-
bishop of Baltimore. Fifth revised edition. Baltimore, 1866.
Vol. I., page 318. [The quotation as above given is from the
original English. Early in the Council a misfortune befell Abp,
Manning, in all respects similar to this of Abp. Spalding. The
following extract was produced from a catechism widely used and
authorized in England, and praised by Manning's own journal,
Tlie Tabid : " Q. Are not Catholics bound to believe that the pope
is in himself infallible ? A. This is a Peotestant invention, and
i-; no article of Catholic belief." Quirinus. 07.]

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 133

views about the case of Honorius. It is no wonder
that, educated at the College of Urban, and being
full of zeal for the Holy See, he should have judged
him very mildly. For the case was not of any such
importance before the rise of the present controversy,
and therefore had not been so thoroughly cleared up
as it now is. I take this opportunity to say a word
of the bishop of Eottenburg's * opinion expressed in
his profoundly learned History of Councils. The
archbishop of Dublin, who has perhaps acquired his
information from the French translation instead of
from the work itself," says that there will be some
difficulty in reconciling this opinion with that which
the bishop of Kottenburg now advocates. A year
ago I read the original work, and it was from that
that I first learned — what my own examination has
since confirmed — that the letters of Honorius to
Sergius do contain some things which, cannot be
reconciled with sound doctrine.

VII. It was with great delight that I listened to
the recent speech of the archbishop of Westminster
in this assembly. I was at a loss which most to
admire, the eloquence of the man, or his fiery zeal
in moving, or rather commanding us to enact the
new definition. The lucid arrangement of topics,
the absolute felicity of diction, the singular grace of
elocution, and the supreme authority and candor of
mind which were resplendent in his speech, almost
extorted from me the exclamation, " Talis cum sis,
ittinam noster esses!" And yet, while I listened, I

[* Bishop HofVlo.]

134 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

could not help thinking of what used to be said of
the English settlers in Ireland — that they were more
Irish than the Irishmen. The most reverend arch-
bishop is certainly more Catholic than any Catholic
I ever knew before. He has no doubt himself of the
infallibility — personal, separate, and absolute — of the
pope, and he is not willing to allow other people to
have any. He declares it to be a doctrine of faith,
and he does not so much demand as he does pre-
dict, that the Vatican Council shall define it as such ;
something perhaps in the style of those prophets who
go to work to bring about the fulfilment of their own
predictions. As for myself — whom the experience
of well nigh sixty years, since I first began to study
the rudiments of the faith, may perhaps have made
as well informed upon this subject as one who has
been numbered with the church for some twenty
years — I boldly declare that that opinion, as it lies
in the schema is not a doctrine of faith, and that it
cannot become such by any definition whatsoever,
even by the definition of a Council. "We are the
keepers of the faith committed to us, not its mas-
ters. We are teachers of the faithful intrusted to
our charge, in just so far as we are witnesses.

The great confusion of ideas which prevails
throughout this controversy seems to me to arise
from an inaccurate notion of certain terms, and from
the neglect of the distinction, which should never be
lost sight of, between theology as a science, and the
revealed truths of which it treats, as an object of our
faith. Let me briefly explain my meaning.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 135

All truths divinely revealed are to be believed
with divine faith, which are propounded as such to
the faithful by the church, whether in councils or
through its ordinary government. Among these
truths some are explicitly revealed, others implicitly.
These last are to be restricted to those truths only
which are necessarily connected with truths expli-
citly revealed, so that one who should deny the for-
mer would be held to have denied the latter also.
Thus the church in its acts of definition is always a
witness, and formulates a judgment only by witness-
ing. It condemns errors which openly contradict
doctrines explicitly revealed, and besides these,
errors opposed to corollaries necessarily deduced
from such doctrines. It is the general opinion of
theologians that it may happen that arguments of
doubtful value shall be adduced in proof of truths of
faith, even in General Councils ; although in declar-
ing the faith itself, the Councils cannot err. The
reason is, that in declaring the faith — an act of which
all bishops, learned and unlearned alike, are capa-
ble— the church acts as witness : in proving the faith,
whether from reason or from Scripture, she sustains
the part not so much of a witness as of a theologian.

It is within the limits above enunciated that that
faith divinely revealed is contained, concerning which
the church as witness is capable of pronouncing a
formal judgment, and of anathematizing gainsayers
as heretics. Among these truths explicitly or im-
plicitly revealed, those which have been denned by
a solemn judgment of the church are said to belong

13G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to the Catholic faith, in distinction from those which,
although revealed, and necessary to be believed, have
not been enunciated or denned by decree of Coun-
cil. But this distinction is merely scholastic, and

implies no difference at all between the two kinds of
truth, so far as respects the obligation of believing
them.

Theology as a science is to be carefully distin-
guished from faith or the body of credenda. It sets
forth the truths of faith in systematic order, and
proves them, in its way of proving, either positively
or scholastically, and deduces sundry conclusions
from truths explicitly or implicitly revealed, which,
for distinction's Bake, are called theological conclu-
sions. These conclusions, not being immediately and
necessarily connected with revealed truths, so that
the denial of them would be deemed a denial of
those truths themselves, cannot be elevated to the
rank of truths of faith, or propounded as such to the
faithful at cost of their everlasting salvation. Prop-
ositions contradictory of them may be condemned
as erroneous, but not as heretical.

In the Vatican Council, this distinction does not
seem to have been observed. The result — a thing
unknown hitherto in Councils — has been that the
bishops are divided among diverse opinions, dispu-
ting, certainly not about doctrines of faith of which
they are witnesses and custodians, but about opin-
ions of the schools. The Council-chamber has been
turned into a theojogical arena, the partisans of op-
posite opinions, not only on this question of the infal-

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 137

libility of the pope, but on other subjects, exchanging
blows back and forth with the hot temper which is
more common in theologians than in bishops, and is
not becoming to either;* for all acknowledge the
Roman pontiff, united with the body of bishops, to
be infallible. Here we have a doctrine of faith.
But not all acknowledge him to be infallible by him-
self alone; neither do all know what is meant by
that formula ; for different parties offer different in-
terpretations of it. Here we Lave the opinions or
views of the schools, about which (as is fair enough)
there are all sorts of mutual contradictions.

It may be objected that by this line of argument
I assail the definition of the immaculate conception
of the blessed Virgin by the bull Incffabilis Dens;
since this opinion was for centuries freely denied by
many, and was afterwards erected into an article of
faith by the bull aforesaid, with the consent and ap-
plause of the body of bishops, as appeal's from their
acts and writings, many of them having been present
at the pontifical definition. Speaking for myself
alone, I give the following frank reply, which per-
haps will meet the approval neither of my friends nor
of others. For a fuller reply, I refer to my Obser-
vations, in the Synopsis,*!* the sum of which is as

[* Compare with this expression Archbishop Manning's solemn
declaration as to what did not occur— " scenes of indecent clamor
and personal violence, unworthy even in laymen, criminal in bishops
of the church." Petri Privilcgium, 3. 28. The coincidence of expres-
sion is curious, one bishop giving the facts as they happened, and
the other the facts as they did not happen.]

f Synopsis Observationnm, pp. 234-238.

138 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

follows : I admit that the blessed Virgin Mary through
the singular favor of God, and in view of the merits
of her Son Jesus Christ, was kept in her conception
from all guilt of Adam's sin. I do not deny that
tins sentiment belongs to the deposit of faith; never-
theless, I have never been able to discover it therein,
so far as that deposit is set forth in the Scriptures
and the writings of the fathers; neither have I ever
found the man who could show it to me there. The
assent of " the Church Dispersed " (as it is called)
proves that the definition to which that assent is
given is not in contradiction to any revealed truth;
since, as I have thready remarked, the church, wheth-
er in council or dispersed, can tolerate nothing which
contradicts the faith. The pious opinion was always
cherished among the faithful — an affection which the
church encouraged, and by the institution of the Feast
of the Conception, almost sanctioned. But it never
delivered it as a doctrine of faith, and popes have
strictly forbidden that the opposite opinion should
be branded with the mark of heresy by its opponents.
If any one should deny that it is a doctrine of faith,
I do not see what answer could be made to him;
for he would reply that the church could not so long
have tolerated an error contrary to truth divinely
revealed, without seeming either ignorant of what
the deposit of faith contained or tolerant of mani-
fest error.

YIII. I now proceed to show that the opinion of
the infallibility of the pope in the sense of the schema,
whether true or false, is not a doctrine of faith, and

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 139

cannot be propounded as such to tlie faithful, even
by the definition of a Council.

Definitions of faith are not incitements to devo-
tion, much less are they the triumphal exaltation of
the opinions of schools of theology, according as one
or another of these gets the upper hand. They are
authoritative expositions of the doctrines of faith,
generally designed to guard against the subterfuges
of innovators, and they never impose upon believers
a new faith.

This being settled, I say that the infallibility of
the pope is not a doctrine of faith.

1. It is not contained in the symbols of the faith ;
it is not presented as an article of faith in the cate-
chisms ; and it is not found as such in any document
of public worship. Therefore the church has not
hitherto taught it as a thing to be believed of faith ;
as, if it were a doctrine of faith, it ought to have
delivered and taught it.

2. Not only has not the church taught it in any
public instrument, but it has suffered it to be im-
pugned, not everywhere, but, with the possible excep-
tion of Italy, almost everywhere in the world, and
that for a long time. This is proved by a witness
above all impeachment — the approbation of Inno-
cent XI. twice conferred upon Bossuet's Exposition
of the Faith, a work in which not only no mention
of this doctrine occurs, but in which the notion is
plainly referred to in the remarks upon matters in
dispute among theologians, on which opinion is free.

To speak only of the English-speaking nations, it

140 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

may be observed that in no one of their symbolical
or catechetical works is this opinion found set down
among truths of faith.

The whole supply of books treating of faith and
piety, down to the beginning of the present century,
and later, has been imported into Ireland and the
United States from England. In many of them the
opposite opinion is given. In none of them is the
opinion itself found as a matter of faith. A year
ago, indeed, in England and the United States, there
came out sundry books — two or three of them to my
knowledge — intended to prepare men's minds to
receive the opinion as belonging to the faith. As for
that one which was published in the United States,
and afterwards translated into French and German,*
written by a pious and extremely zealous but igno-
rant man, I may say that it abounded in such grave
blunders, at least in the first edition in English, as
to excite more laughter than indignation in others
beside me, holding different opinions on the pending
question. When I was solicited by the author to
give some sort of commendation to the little book,
which is measurably damaging to the bishops, I did
not wish to trouble the good man with a debate, and
so, in an unguarded moment, I promised him the
charity of silence.

It was known, indeed, among us that the school
of theologians commonly called by us Ultramontanes,
upheld the opinion of papal infallibility in a sense

[* The writer here refers to a work on The Infallibility of the
Pope by the Rev. Father YVeninger, S. J. , of Cincinnati. ]

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 141

more favorable to papal privileges than the other
theologians. And that opinion, after the translation
into English of the distinguished Joseph De Mais-
tre's work on The Pope, widely prevailed among
among clergy and laity, and still prevails, yet not as
a doctrine of faith, but as a free opinion which seems
to have in its favor important reasons and weighty
names. But to return to the point.

For almost two centuries there has been in use
among English-speaking Catholics a little book en-
titled, "Roman-catholic Principles in Reference to God
and the King." So widely circulated is this little
book, that from 1748 to 1813 were printed thirty-five
editions of it, in a separate form ; besides that, being
very brief, it was often appended to other works.
The Very Reverend Vicar Apostolic Coppinger, in
England, at the opening of the present century, had
it printed twelve times over ; and another vicar apos-
tolic, Walmesley, a man of the highest erudition, left
his written opinion of this book, commending it to
his friends for its clearness and good judgment. On
the present question it speaks as follows :

" It is no matter of faith to believe that the pope
is in himself infallible, separated from the church,
even in expounding the faith. By consequence
papal definitions or decrees, in whatever .form pro-
nounced, taken exclusively from a General Council
or universal acceptance of the church, oblige none,
under pain of heresy, to an interior assent."*

* Roman-catholic Principles, etc. Kirk's edition, Butler's His-
torical Memoirs, vol. 4, Appendix, p. 501.

112 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The work is printed in full in the Appendix to
Charles Butler's Historical Memoirs, which may be
found in the library of the English college in this
city.

We have with us a witness from the United
States of North America, in the person of the most
reverend archbishop of Baltimore, who lias expressed
his opinion on this point, not in the historical work
from which I have quoted, which, as likely to meet
the eye of other than Catholic readers, might seem,
perhaps, to permit a more liberal explanation of the
subject; but in a lecture delivered to the faithful in
his own cathedra] church, while he was bishop of
Louisville, To the great benefit of the church, he
collected the lectures into a volume, and published
them. The volume has been often reprinted, and a
copy of the fourth edition, printed at Baltimore hi
1866, is preserved in the library of the American col-
lege in this city, having been ppesented to the library
by the author, with an inscription in his own hand-
writing, in the year 1867, when he was here.

He delivers many admirable arguments on the
infallibility of the church ; then, refuting the objec-
tions commonly made against it, he sa

" Do we mean to say that even the pope is im-
peccable or mfalhble in his private and individual
capacity? No Catholic divine ever so much as
dreamed of saying or thinking so. Do we mean to
say that the pope, viewed in his public and official
capacity, when he speaks out as the organ and vis-
ible head of the church, is gifted with infallibility ?

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENEICK. 143

No Catholic divine ever defended his infallibility,
even under suck circumstances, unless when the
matters on which he uttered his definitions were inti-
mately connected with the doctrines of faith and
morals, and when, if he should be permitted by God
to fall into error, there would be danger of the whole
church being also led astray. Those numerous and
learned Catholic theologians who maintain the infal-
libility of the Koman pontiff in this particular case,
consider it as if matter of opinion more or less cer-
.tain, not as one of Catholic faith, [the Italics are by
the archbishop himself,] defined by the church and
obligatory on all. Though not an article of Catholic
faith, it is, however, the general belief among Cath-
olics ; and I myself am inclined strongly to advocate
its soundness, chiefly on account of the intimate con-
nection between the pontiff and the church, as will
be shown in a subsequent lecture. Still, it is an
opinion, for all this, and no Catholic would venture
to charge the great Bossuet, for example, with being
wanting in orthodoxy for denying it, while he so
powerfully and so eloquently established the infalli-
bility of the Church."*

It is scarcely necessary to remark that the scho-
lastic distinction between " doctrines of the faith" and
" doctrines or dogmas of the Catholic faith," cannot
be brought in to break the force of the conclusion,
derived from sources so numerous and so important,

* Lectures on the Evidences of Catholicity, delivered in the
Cathedral of Louisville, by M. J. Spalding, D. D. , Archbishop of
Baltimore. Fourth edition, revised and enlarged. Baltimore,
18GG. Pp. 2G3-4.

144 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

that the opinion of the infallibility of the pope lias
not been delivered to the faithful as a thing to be be-
lieved with divine faith. This notion is never men-
tioned except when it becomes necessary to refer to
it in meeting the objections of opponents, and it is
always asserted that it does not belong to the faith.
It is not to be admitted that in those circumstances,
men of the weightiest character, distinguished with
the office of priest or bishop, would have made use of
verbal quibbles which it would be hardly possible tot
their opponents to understand ; such a quibble would
be that scholastic distinction between a doctrine of the
faith and a dogma of the Catholic faith. The bishop
of Elphin said, in reply to the archbishop of Cincin-
nati, that Catholics had not denied the opinion of
the infallibility of the pope as a doctrine of faith, but
had denied that it was a dogma of the Catholic or
denned faith. If this is true, which I by no means
believe, the reproach is justly and deservedly to be
applied to us, that in a matter of the gravest conse-
quence we have not been ashamed to hide our mean-
ing by making use of scholastic distinctions.

It remains now to speak of the faith of the church
of Ireland.

In that very learned speech of his, which remahis
thus far unanswered, and, as I confidently predict,
will continue to be unanswered, the light reverend
bishop of St. Augustine in North America (than
whom no man in this assembly is more worthy of the
respect due, at all times, and from all persons what-
soever, to the Episcopal dignity) remarked that the

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENIUCK. 145

Irish Catholics believe their own priests infallible,
and therefore (as he asserted) it was no wonder that
they should consider the pope of Kome infallible.
It seemed to some that he was using an exaggerated
expression, rather in joke than in earnest.

And yet it is perfectly true, and so far from being
a reproach to Irishmen, it is a very great honor to
them, and in the highest degree agreeable to Catholic
principles. The Irish think their priests infallible
because they receive them as the ministers of the
infallible church, and therefore as in accordance with
it in their sermons to the people. In just that sense
and no other, although with even a greater reverence,
on account of his higher rank in the hierarchy of the
church, they accept the pope of Rome as infallible.
I admit that in many respects they are inferior to
other nations; but in this they yield to none — that
they are most devoted to the Catholic faith, and
most loyal in their obedience to the see of Rome.
In both respects that may be said of them which
was inscribed by Louis XYI. on the standard of
some of them, who had served as mercenaries under
the title of the Irish Brigade in his army and in those
of his predecessors from Louis XIY.'s time — that
they were "semper et ubiqiie fideles" But that they
have any intelligent knowledge of the question now
under discussion, or are capable of forming an opin-
ion about it, is too ridiculous to need refuting. This
is true of the meeting lately held at Cork, of which
the bishop of Cashel spoke at the opening of his very
neat speech ; since it is open to doubt whether the

Vatican Council. /

146 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

right reverend bishop of Cork himself, who was said
to have presided at the meeting, understood Che sub-
ject; for there are a good many in this assembly of
ours who are in doubt up to this moment what is
meant by papal infallibility, whether it is to follow
the words of the schema, or in preference that miti-
gated Interpretation which the archbishop of Malines,
following the example of the bishop of Poitiers, in-
troduced into his explanation. For those cunning
men who are the real authors of the schema — I do
not mean the bishops; whom I do mean will appear
before long — well knew that there wire many of the
fathers who would accept, without being in the least
startled, the mitigated explanation (which, neverthe-
less, had not yet been introduced into the schema)
and, without thinking, would vote for the definition
in the form set forth in the schema, at least for sub-
stance ; whom perhaps a clearer statement of the
sense of it would have found in the attitude of dis-
sent from it. But to return to our own people.

The question before us is not about the faith of
the people, but about the judgment of prelates and
doctors. I do not deny that, at the present time,
the episcopate and clergy of Ireland, with the ex-
ception of a few distinguished names, is inclined in
favor of the notion of papal infalhbihty; although
I have had no means of finding out their opinions,
except what this opportunity at Rome has furnished
me. But from the beginning it was not so ; in evi-
dence of which I cite the well-nigh universal appro-
bation with which the contrary opinion was set forth

SPEECH OF AEOHBISHOP KENRICK. 147

in writings from the pens of the most eminent men —
who seemed to be pillars, as I might say, of the Irish
church — during my youth, and since, being come to
manhood, I was advanced to the priesthood. These
writings were edited and published repeatedly.by a
man of consummate learning, of still greater genius,
of most fervent piety, and of a zeal for souls truly
apostolic, adorned with the episcopal dignity — I
mean the Eight Beverend James Doyle, bishop of
Kildare and Leighlen, and by the Eev. Arthur O'Lea-
ry, a priest of the order of St. Francis, and seem
to have had the approbation of every one. Besides
these, we have the answers of Archbishops Murray
and O'Kelly of Dublin and Tuam, and of the afore-
said bishop of Kildare and Leighlen, to the questions
put to them by a committee of the British Parlia-
ment, in March, 1825.

All these, translated into Latin, with the original
text annexed, may be found in the appendix to this
speech. They leave no room for doubt what was the
opinion of the Irish bishops at that time. The same
will be manifest from the resolutions of the bishops
of all Ireland presented to the Holy See in 1815,
which, although they do not pertain to the present
controversy, like the answers before mentioned, do
show that the opinion which is said to be now prev-
alent has not always obtained." 4f the matters cited

[* These documents may be found in full, in Latin and English,
at the close of Kenrick's speech as reprinted in the Doc. ad lllustr.
Cone. Vat. It has not seemed necessary to reproduce them in this
edition.]

148 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

from the synod of Turles seem to have a different
sound, perhaps it happened there, as it did at the
second synod of Baltimore, that everything was
done according to the nod of the apostolic legate ;
especially as no question arose there except ques-
tions of discipline, and no occasion was afforded to
say or to decree anything on the rights of the bish-
ops, as at the assembly held in 1815, or on the en-
largement, in words at least, of the authority of the
Holy See.

As to the clergy, I confidently deny that on this
point they differed from the bishops. For whenco
should they have derived a contrary opinion ? Sure-
ly not from the seminaries in France and Spain, in
which, before the founding of Maynooth college in
Ireland, about the end of the last century, the major-
ity pursued their theological studies, and from which
they would have brought home with them the un-
doubted sentiments of those famous schools, and not
others. But in Maynooth college, the theological lec-
turers from the beginning were almost all Frenchmen ;
and their treatises, for a long time after their death,
were, by college ordinance, placed in the hands of
the students. I was myself present at the beginning
of the change in the sentiment of that famous col-
lege— if indeed there has been a change, of which I
have no knowledgeaexcept by conjecture ; and along
with me was the bishop of Cashel and the bishop of
Clonfert, who was but lately here ; all of us at that
time walked together with one accord in that home

* Appendix A.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 149

consecrated to learning and religion. This was the oc-
casion, to which it will perhaps not be useless to refer.

Almost forty years have passed since I there pur-
sued the study of theology under the learned John
O'Hanlon, then lecturer in theology, now professor
of higher theological science in the same college.
The treatise De Ecclesia by that man of venerated
memory, Delahogue, one of the French emigres in
the time of the great Revolution, contained nothing
on the infallibility of the pope except a thesis con-
ceived in these or like words : "that the infallibility
of the pope is not matter of faith."

In 1831, the aforesaid lecturer on theology,' O'Han-
lon, of his own accord gave us the thesis. " The pope
speaking ex cathedra is infallible," not in order to con-
vince us of it, but to give us the opportunity of be-
coming acquainted with this weighty opinion, by the
reasons in favor of it, adduced from various quarters.
If I remember aright, he did not express his own
opinion or press us to accept either side of this dis-
puted question. I confess that I was one of those
who took the affirmative. But the new and hitherto
unheard-of procedure did not meet the approval of
all the professors, one of whom, the lecturer on Holy
Scripture, who afterwards came to be president of
the college, expressed his displeasure in pretty plain
terms to my classmate, now bishop of Clonfert, from
whom I learned the fact. We have with us in this
Council a most respected man, who used to be a the-
ological instructor in that college for years before I
entered it, who is justly and deservedly esteemed the

150 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Nestor of the Irish episcopate, since he has known
well nigh three generations of men, and who to emi-
nent learning hi theology unites the fame of elegant
literary culture ; he was well acquainted with the prel-
ates whom I have mentioned, and with other learn-
ed men whose names, "dara el venerabilia," are writ-
ten in the hearts and the calendars of the Irish peo-
ple. With singular moderation this eminent man
refrained from uttering himself on this subject; so
that the archbishop of Dublin did not hesitate to
speak for him and impress him into his party ; while
those who think with 1m1, and had known liim, and
who had hoped to see him fighting in our ranks, were
grieved to see him, like another Aehilles, Bitting apart
from us. It filled me with quite unexpected delight
when I heard him say that in judgments of faith the
head should be joined with the body — not as the
archbishop of Westminster would have it, that the
head should drag the body to itself by communica-
ting to it its own infallibility, but that head and body,
by bearing joint testimony to the faith once delivered
to the saints, should make unanimous declaration of
the same. As he came down from the platform, I
congratulated him with the words, " You have vindi-
cated Ireland." If witnesses to the faith of the
Irish are to be weighed — which is the fair way — in-
stead of counted, the most reverend archbishop of
Tuam may well be offset, as a matter of mere testi-
mony, against the rest of the Irish bishops, not even
excepting the archbishop of Dublin.*

[* "The infallibilist speaker who created most sensation was

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 151

The bishop of Galway says that the Catholics in
Ireland and England were admitted to equal rights
with Protestants, not on account of the oath which
all, whether ecclesiastics or laymen, were for years
obliged to take, but because those in charge of the
English government were afraid of civil war unless
that concession were made. In this he spoke the
truth ; but it was nothing to the point ; and the true
cause of the truth which he uttered seemed to be
quite unknown to him.

The papal power has always been excessively
odious-to the British government. Now if it were a
doctrine of faith that the pope is infallible, it could
be shown that Protestants had understood the papal
power better than English and Irish Catholics them-
selves. For they knew that the popes of Kome had
claimed supreme power in temporal things, and had at-
tempted to dethrone more than one English monarch
by dispensing his subjects from their oaths of allegiance.

Cardinal Cullen, archbishop of Dublin. He gained the warm ap-
plause of his party by the aggressive tone of his speech, in which
he attacked especially Hefele and Kenrick. He appealed to the
testimony of Mac Hale [Archbishop of Tuam] to show that the
mind of Ireland has always been infallibilist— a glaring falsehood,
as is proved by the famous Declaration of the Irish Catholics in
1757, formally repudiating the doctrine. And it made no slight
impression when the gray-haired Mac Hale rose to repudiate the
pretended belief in infallibility, not merely for himself, but for
Ireland." Quirinus, 557. Wherever this Speech of Kenrick's
throws light upon the severest things said in Quirinus and Ce qui
se passe au Concile, etc. , it confirms them. "Witness the very next
page of Quirinus : ' ' When Cullen replied to the archbishop of St.
Louis, lnon est verum' ['it isn't true !'] the aged prelate request-
ed leave of the legates to defend himself briefly. It was refused. '
Compare above, p. 95.]

152 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Over and over again, the Catholics had denied,
under their solemn oath, that this power belonged to
the pope of Rome within the realm of England. If
they had not done this, they never would have been,
and never ought to have been, admitted to the privi-
lege of civil liberty. How it is possible for the faith
thus pledged to the British government to be recon-
ciled with the definition of papal infallibility, when it
is certain that the popes have often with great solem-
nity declared that the right belonged to them, and
have never renounced it, those of the Irish bishops
may look to, who, like myself, have taken the oath
in question. It is a knot which I cannot untie.
Daunts sum, non (Edipus, Notwithstanding these
things, civil liberty was granted to the Catholics by
men who had fought stoutly against it all their lives
long. They feared civil war, indeed, but they did
not dread it in this sense, that a war of this sort
could be damaging to the power of the government
in any other way than as a temporary interruption
of the public peace. They feared the fact of war —
not the issue of it ; what that would have been, no
man of sense could doubt. Those illustrious men
preferred rather to yield, than to triumph by the
destruction of a renowned nation, and of a people who
even in their errors (as they deemed them) were
worthy of a better fate. Would that the moderation
of mind showed by those men might be showed by the
majority of the bishops who hear me, and that fore-
seeing the calamities that may come forth among us
out of this ill-omened controversy, they might, in

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENEICK. 153

this exigency that calls for the utmost moderation,
avert from ns who are less in number, but who repre-
sent a larger number of Catholics than our oppo-
nents— and not from us only, but from the Catholic
world — calamities which cannot be anticipated with-
out horror, and which a tardy repentance will be
powerless to repair.

IX. I have something to say now on a case of
conscience. The case is this, as you know : that the
bishops should be reminded that a grave sin would
be committed by any bishop who should vote in the
affirmative on papal infallibility, without having per-
sonally and, as the phrase goes, "on his own hook,"
made a thorough examination of the subject ; when
by that act a new yoke is imposed on the faithful,
and the gravest inconveniences are by many thought
likely to ensue from it.* .

The archbishop of Westminster takes this very
hardly, complaining of it as an outrage on the honor
and dignity of the bishops ; as if he held it impossi-
ble for bishops to err, or that they would be clear of
all imputation of grave sin, if through carelessness
or indolence they should neglect to form a right
judgment on this business.

Can they acquiesce in an opinion which perhaps
they have never weighed — following the statements
of teachers in the seminaries, with the docility which
is becoming in pupils towards the learned? The
pamphlet by the most reverend archbishop of Edes-
sa, commended to the pope by the eleven erudite

* See Quirinus, 021.

7*

154 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

theologians, is perhaps to be taken as setting forth
such weighty reasons in proof of the infallibility of
the pope, that since no one ought to hesitate to put
confidence in it, every one may safely accept its con-
clusions as so many truths placed beyond every
chance of doubt. I am not denying the writer's
learning ; neither do I wish to call in question his
good faith ; but I can prove that in this matter he is
not free from all error, and that thus far his author-
ity is none too much to be trusted. Besides the
example already alleged when I was speaking of the
meaning of the text "On this rock/' &e., I mention
two others: one from the testimonies of the fathers,
the other in the method of his argument.

Among the passages which he cites from the
fathers is that very common text of St. Ambrose,
Which I subjoin, taken from pages 31 and 32 :

" On Psalm 40, No. 30, he speaks as follows : ' It
is Peter himself to whom he says, " Thou art Peter,
and on this rock will I build my church." Therefore
where Peter is, there is the church ; where the
church is, there is no death, but life eternal. And
therefore he adds, "And the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it ; and I will give thee the keys of
the kingdom of heaven." Blessed Peter, against
whom the gates of hell have not prevailed, nor the
gates of heaven been closed, but who, on the con-
trary, has destroyed the vestibules of hell, and made
clear those of heaven — who has opened heaven and
shut up hell ! Doubtless if where Peter is, (or where
his successors, the popes, are, holding all the prerog-

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 155

atives of the primacy,) there the church is, and life
eternal without peril of death, then the whole build-
ing of the church must necessarily be founded in
their faith. Wherefore this must needs be indefec-
tible, and so the gates of hell being vanquished, they
themselves, embracing in the true faith all Christ's
faithful, open to them the heavenly mansions.' "

This passage was cited by the bishop of Orleans,*
in his first letter, as one which might be objected to
his position, and he there explained it in a sense
consistent with his views, having no doubt that the
text of Ambrose was to be received in some other
sense than the obvious one, and that, really, it meant
that the church was identified with Peter in the case
of controverted points of faith, which, so far from
denying, the bishop openly admitted. Among others
who replied to this letter, was the learned Francesco
Nardi, one of the Auditors of the Sacred Bota, and an
officer of this Council. Yielding to love of truth
rather than of party, he denies that the words of St.
Ambrose have the meaning which the bishop of
Orleans, among others, believed. I quote his words
in the original Italian, so that no one may suspect
that the meaning of them has been modified in trans-
lation. After giving the explanation of the bishop of
Orleans, above referred to, he adds :

" Del resto il valore delle parole di S. Ambrogio
(in psalm xl., Enarr. n. 30) non credo sia quello che
indica lo illustre vescovo, e basta leggerne il con-
testo. Ivi trattasi della caduta di S. Pietro sanata

* Bishop Dupanloup.

15G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

da Cristo, e come Pietro in essa rappresenti il cristi-
ano cadente, poi risorgente, per opera della Cbiesa e
di Cristo, senza dnbbio quelle parole hanno un altro
piii ampio ed alto significato, ed b Che Pietro piii cbe
contrasegno, e veramente il rappresentante della
vera Cbiesa e la sua immagine vivente e operante.
Non credo cbe S. Ambrogio in quel luogo pensasse
ad altre cJuese crisUane, e come da esse si distingue la
cattolica, per la presenza e governo di Pietro."*

" Furthermore, I do not tbink that the meaning
of St. Ambrose' words is that attributed to them by
the illustrious bishop. The context settles it. The
subject there is Peter's fall restored by Christ ; and
since Peter represents therein the backsliding Chris-
tian afterwards recovered through the work of Christ
and the church, undoubtedly the words have another
and a far wider and deeper meaning, to wit, that
Peter is more than a symbol — he is an actual repre-
sentative of the true church, and its living and acting
image. I do not think that St. Ambrose in that
passage was thinking of other Chris! urn churches, and
of how the Catholic church is distinguished from
them by the presence and government of Peter, "f

Monsignor Nardi is right, as I find by consulting
the passage in Ambrose. I beg you to observe that

* Sulla ultima lettera di Monsignor Vescovo d'Orleans, osser-
vazioni di Monsignor Francesco Nardi, Uditore di Sacra Rota.
Seconda Edizione. Napoli, 1870.

f It is quite in the style of Ambrose thus devoutly and ele-
gantly to identify Peter with the church. See lib. 1, cap. 4, Lucce.
Also lib. 5 in Lucce cap. 5. Also the context just precedirg the
place above cited.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 157

the passage was quoted to prove that Peter is iden-
tified with the church — -which we all admit, but not
in the sense of the schema. It is not qu6ted to prove
that by the rock Ambrose understands the apostle,
for this is not the point in question. Unless, in the
place cited, the church is identified with Peter in the
sense of the schema, it affords no argument in support
of the schema. The same must be said of all the
other quotations, not one of which explicitly gives
that view, although the writer attempts, by dint of
argument to extract it from them. This one example
shows how dangerous it is blindly to follow others in
quoting the fathers. A striking proof of this may be
found in the appendix to this speech ; although it
does not relate to the pending question, it gives
abundant proof of my assertion, and may serve the
purpose I have in view.*

As an example of false inference, I take page 74,
where the author tries to prove that the Council of
Constance admitted that the pope was above the
Council, a question which I will not go into at pres-
ent. He proves it in this fashion :

[* In the appendix referred to, Abp. Kenriclc speaks of having
heard, twelve years ago, an Easter sermon in which the preacher
said that the Lord after his resurrection appeared first to the
blessed Virgin Mary — which is contrary to Mark 16 : 0. Inquir-
ing further, he found the same assertion in a work of Pope Bene-
dict XIV., who, while remarking that Estius declares the contrary,
nevertheless thought it better to stick to the pious tradition on this
point, notwithstanding it is in open contradiction to the loords of the
evangelist I

The remainder of this appendix is not important to the matter
in hand ; but the passage above quoted is wonderfully character-
istic of Roman theology and devotion.]

158 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

"In the conciliar epistle, addressed to the Ger-
man prelates, which Martin, * sacro approbante
Concilio,' published against the errors of Wiclif and
Huss, one of the articles set forth to be believed is
this : That the pope is the head of the Catholic
church. Therefore the pope bears the same relation
to the church universal and to the general Council
representing it as the head bears fcd the body. But
from the head the body receives motion and every
influence. Therefore, according to the Council of
Constance itself, a general council receives all its
power of governing the church, not immediately from
Christ, but mediately, through the pope, the head of
the cluircli. But this cannot be reconciled with what
is said in the decree of the fourth and fifth sessions,
if the latter is to be received in the sense in which it
is taken by the opposition."

The fallacy of the above reasoning is this : The
pope is Christ's vicegerent in so far as Christ has
conferred on him the power of representing Him as
the visible head to the faithful. But in the foregoing
argument Christ is supposed to have conferred on
him the entire fulness of his own power, inasmuch
as he is the head of the church, which is His body ;
a notion which is denied by the advocates of the
opposite opinion. He who exercises a delegated
power is not to be considered as having the entire
power of the one delegating, but only just so much
as can be proved, by the documents in the case, to
have been conferred upon him. The church, there-
fore, may receive motion and every influence imme-

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENEICK. 159

diately from Clirist himself, tlie true head of the
body, not through the medium of the visible head —
that is, the Koman pontiff— unless it appears that
Christ, in the government of his church, has reserved
nothing to himself ; which is supposed, but not
proved, by the author of the Lucubration.

Speaking of the case of conscience, the arch-
bishop of Baltimore asserted that examination was
no less required to vote in the negative than in the
affirmative on the question of papal infallibility. I
think he was mistaken. He who refuses his consent
to impose a new burden on the faithful contracts no
obligation ; while he who gives his consent (unless,
under the force of reasons such as set aside all
doubt, he should decide that the affirmative opinion
is not only true, but also divinely revealed, and that
it is expedient to propound it as such to the faithful
to be believed) would be guilty of the most grievous
sin. It is not true that by withholding his assent he
affirms the four articles of the French Assembly, as
the archbishop of Baltimore says — an assertion
which seemed to me and to others unworthy of so
honorable a man.

And now that that famous Assembly has been
mentioned, and now that an acrimonious attack has
been made by one of our right reverend orators on
a man of eminent learning and character on account
of his refutation of a so-called history of that Assem-
bly, suffer me to say a word of both these books,
which I have not only read but carefully compared
with each other. The Historv of the Gallican

160 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Assembly, which has been so bepraised, is in

my judgment a very infamous libel, the author of
which has sharpened his pen against the dead, dis-
turbing the ashes of those who had no connection
whatever with the Assembly, ;is well as of those who
controlled and directed it.*

That he has made many mutilated quotations,
which, by failing to give the whole text, insinuate
falsehood even when they do not explicitly utter it,
has been proved by the Abbe* Loyson.f That learned
man has exhibited these facts with the calmness of
mind which is characteristic of him, and which, when
compared with the temper of the other book, shows
him to be a defender of truth and not an insinuater
of falsehood. This accounts for the anger which he
has stirred up on the part of his antagonists,

X. The archbishop of Westminster holds infalli-
bility to be a spiritual gift, or charisma. If that is
true, I agree to it in the case of the person making
good his claim to the gift ; for in the strict sense of
the word it is predicable only of a person. The
usage has prevailed, indeed, of predicating infalli-
bility, of the church, but it would be better to use
the word inerrancy.

God only is infallible. Of the church, the most
that we can assert is, that it does not err in teaching

* Reckerclies Historiques sur l'Assemblec; da Clerge de France
de 1G82, par M. Germ.

f L'Assernbleo du Clerge de France de 1682, d'apres dea docu-
ments dont un grand nombre inconnues jusqu' a ce jour, par
l'Abbe I. Th. Loyson, Docteur et Professeur de Sorbonne. [The
Abbe Loyson is a younger brother of the cobbrated Father
Hyacinths. ]

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 161

the doctrines of faith which Christ has committed to
its charge ; because the gates of hell are not to pre-
vail against it. Therefore infallibility absolute and
complete cannot be predicated of it ; and perhaps it
would be better to refrain from using that word, and
use the word inerrancy instead. But the church's
inerrancy does not seem to be a positive thing,
infused into it from heaven — which could not be
intelligently said of a " moral person " like the
church — although it is always so aided by the grace
of the Holy Spirit that it may faithfully keep and set
forth the truths which Christ had taught. For this
end it has a fit means— but not at all a miraculous
means — in the tradition of the particular churches of
which it consists. Therefore the inerrancy, or infal-
libility, of the church is not a cltarisnta infused from
heaven, as the archbishop of Westminster would
have it, by which it may discover and distinguish
truths divinely revealed. It is nothing else, in my
opinion, than the tradition of the church divinely
founded and kept by the divine indwelling, so that
it shall not tolerate errors contradicting revealed
truths and their immediate and necessary corollaries,
nor propound to the faithful, by its supreme author-
ity, anything that is not true.

As I was saying this, not long ago, a Catholic
objected that infallibility though not a miraculous,
was a supernatural gift ; that is, a grace annexed to
the office of pope, by means of which, without any
miraculous intervention of God he can discern true
from false and revealed truth from natural.

162 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Since the Roman pontiff, as bishop, has no other
grace of ordination than his brethren who share the
same Episcopal office, the supposed grace can only
be a personal one. But that kind of grace does not
preserve from error those even to whom it is granted
in the largest measure, as appears from the saints
who in the great schism were found on both sides,
although eminent in virtue and splendid with the
glory of miracles. If papal infallibility is a personal
grace or charisma, as the archbishop of Westminster
calls it, it demands a miraculous intervention of God,
that the pope, when he means to define anything of
faith or morals, may be kept free from error.

It may be shown in another way that this novel
invention of the charisma ought to be rejected, from
the consequences which it involves. Granting that
infalhbility is a charisma, in what does it differ from
that special private inspiration by which certain per-
sons think themselves led, and which is rejected by
theologians on this precise ground, that no means is
granted, outside of the person who considers himself
to be led by the divine Spirit, by which it may be
proved whether the spirit really is divine. Not one
word will the archbishop of Westminster listen to, of
fixing the conditions for the exercise of the pope's
infallibility. He asserts that He who gave the
charisma will give the means for its due exercise, or
will bring it about that such means shall be used.

Yerily this is a royal road to the discovery of the
truths of faith ! And yet it is not without its dangers
both for pope and for church. Once imbued with

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 163

this conviction, the holier in life, the purer in pur-
pose, the more fervent in piety the pope should be,
the more dangerous he would prove both to himself
and to the church, which (according to this system)
derives its infallibility from him ; especially would
this be true if he should find even one of his advisers
laboring under the same illusion. What need would
there be, to a pope who accepted this notion, of the
counsel of his brethren, the opinions of theologians,
the investigation of the documents of the church?
Believing himself to be immediately led by the
divine Spirit, and that this Spirit is communicated
through him to the church, there would be nothing
to hold him back from pressing on in a course on
which he had once entered. These consequences of
the principle laid down by the archbishop of West-
minster prove it to be false. Nevertheless if infalli-
bility is a charisma, we must be able to follow out
the fact to its conclusions.

XI. Among other things which utterly astounded
me, it was said by the archbishop of Westminster
that by the addition made at the end of the decree
De Fide, passed at the third session, we had already
admitted the doctrine of papal infallibility, at least
by implication, and that we were no longer free to
recede from it.*

* The addition was as follows : " Since it is not enough to avoid
heretical pravity, unless at the same time those errors are diligent-
ly avoided which more or less tend to it, we warn all persons of
the duty of observing also the constitutions and decrees in which
such erroneous opinions, which themselves are not expressly enu-
merated, have been proscribed and prohibited by this Holy See."

1G4 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

If I rightly understand the right reverend relator
of the committee, who, when this addition had once
been moved in the General Congregation, then with-
drawn, and finally, while we W6T6 wondering what the
matter was, suddenly moved a second time, he said, in
plain terms, that no doctrine at all was taught bj it,
hut that it was placed at the end of the four chapters
of which the decree was composed, in order to round
them oil' handsomely;11 and that it was rather disci-
plinary than doctrinal in its character. Either lie
was deceived, if what the archbishop of Westminster
said was tine; or else lie intentionally led us into
error — which we are hardly at liberty to suppo
so honorable a man. However it may have been,
many of the bishops, confiding in his assurance,
decided not to refuse their suffrages to the decree on
account of that clause ; while others, of whom I was
one, were afraid that there was a trap set, and yield-
ed reluctantly on this point to the will of others. !

In saying all this, it is not my intention to ac-
cuse any of the right reverend fathers of bad faith.
I treat them all, as is meet, with due reverence. But
it is said that we have among us, outside of the
Council, certain "religious" men — who are perhaps
pious as well as "religious" — who have a vast influ-
ence upon the Council; who, relying rather on trick-
ery than on fair measures, have brought the interests
of the church into that extreme peril from which it
has risen ; who at the beginning of the Council man-

[* "Imponi tanquani eis coronidem convenientem."]
f Appendix, p. 171. See also above, p. 83.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENHICK. 165

aged to have no one appointed on the committees of
the Council but those who were known or believed
to be in favor of their schemes ; who, following hard
in the footsteps of certain of their predecessors, in
the schemata that have been proposed to us, and
which have come out of their own workshop, seem to
have had nothing so much at heart as the deprecia-
tion of the authority of the bishops and the exalta-
tion of the authority of the pope ; and seem disposed
to impose upon the unwary with twists and turns of
expression, which may be differently explained by
different persons. These are the men who have
blown up this conflagration in the church ; and they
do not cease to fan the flame by spreading among
the people their writings, which put on the outward
show of piety, but are destitute of its reality.

With more zeal than knowledge, these excellent
men would like to cover up the design of the divine
Architect with another and, as they may think, a
better and stronger one. For He had consulted at
once for the unity of the whole, and the liberty of
every part ; nor had he conferred the entire fulness
of his own power on the vicar appointetl by himself;
knowing what was in man, and not wishing that any
one should have lordship over the dergy, that is, his
"portion," [n?Jjpoc~\ the church.

Already in vain the petition has been offered that
this painful controversy might not be started in the
Council. Equally in vain the petition has been
urged that there might be no definition until after
an examination which should leave no room for

1GG THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

doubt as to the testimony of tradition on this point.
In order to such an examination, the request was
presented, nearly three months ago, to their eminen-
ces the presidents of the general congregation, in a
petition from prelates of distinguished sees, that
there might be a committee of fathers, taken in equal
number from each party, and appointed by the votes
of those agreeing nith them in opinion. This re-
quest was repeated over and over again by others in
the General Congregation; and is said to have had
the approval of some even of (he advocates of papal
infallibility. For the question is one which calls for
an investigation of the records of the entire church,
and should be dealt with in a calm rather than an
excited temper. The archbishop of Dublin says, in-
deed, that such an examination would last too long —
that it would reach till the day of judgment. If this
be so, it were better to refrain from making any defi-
nition at all, than to frame one prematurely. But it
is said the honor and authority of the Holy See de-
mand a definition, nor can it be deferred without
injury to both. I answer in the words of Jerome,
substituting another word for the well-known' word
auctoritas.

MAJOR EST SALUS ORBIS QUAM UltBIS *

I have done.

* It is better to save the world than the city.

SPEECH'OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 167

APPENDIX A.

[SEE PAGE 148.]

SECOND PLENARY COUNCIL OF BALTI-
MORE.

The remarks in the speech call for a brief state-
ment of the facts which occurred in that Council. It
commenced on the 7th of October, and closed on the
21st of the same month, each of these two days be-
ing Sunday. Beside.s the solemn sessions held on
these days, there were two others on intermediate
days, namely, the 11th and the 18th, only the latter
of which was professedly a solemn session, although
the other, dedicated to expiation for the souls of de-
parted bishops, was an equal hinderance to the use
at least of the whole day for the business of the
Council ; so that the business was confined to ten or
eleven days. Within that brief space of time, there
seem to have been passed the decrees which are
contained in 274 pages of a volume of large size.
All of them, indeed, had been prepared, in advance
of the meeting of the Council, by the archbishop of
Baltimore, with the cooperation of several theologi-
ans, and the aid of sundry bishops, of whom I was
one.

The transactions of the first four days seemed to
me hardly in accordance with the rules of Councils,
and accordingly, on the 12th of October, in the Fifth
Private Congregation, I offered the following decree,

108 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

in the hope that thereafter, at least, business might
go on in a better way :

"It has pleased the fathers that the decrees lo
be passed in this Council be offered drawn up in the
form of Synodic decrees, and that the sense of the
fathers of each province be called for, in the order of
consecration in that province. Furthermore, it has
pleased them that mitred abbots be interrogated at
the same time with the bishops in whose provinces
their monasteries are situated, although their votes
are not to be taken. The votes of the fathers, as
soon as given, after the statement of their reason (if
they wish to sustain that reason by showing the

grounds thereof) shall be immediately recorded by
the secretaries

The reason of the decree thus offered was two-
fold. I wished that in voting the fathers might
distinctly know what the question was — which, I
thought, had not always happened in previous con-
gregations.

Since the abbots had only an advisory voice, I
wanted the bishops to be interrogated by provinces,
and that after the bishops of each province, the ab-
bots should manifest then- views; so that those whose
votes were still to be given might have the opportu-
nity of knowing what the abbots thought. For what
was the use of inviting them to the Council, if they
were not to be allowed to express then- opinion until
after all the bishops had voted, when they could be
of no use either to themselves or to anybody else ?

The proposed decree was rejected, twelve yeas to

SPEECH OF AECHBISHOP KENRICK. 169

thirty-two nays ; either because the matter was not
well understood, or because the apostolic legate
vehemently objected to it, and they did not like to
displease him: or (as I think likely) because they
had no hope that it would improve the course of
business, and were unwilling to be compelled to
remain longer away from their dioceses for no real
advantage.

I then offered an exception which I had brought
with me in writing, (foreseeing that the decree which
I had proposed would not pass,) in the following or
like terms :

" The undersigned, archbishop of St. Louis, takes
exception against all decrees passed or that may be
passed in the present Council, which shall not have
been drawn up in conciliar form and distinctly read
to the fathers, and approved by a majority vote.
PETER RICHARD KENRICK,

Archbishop of St. Louis.

In offering this exception, I said that in order to
avoid scandal to the faithful, I would sign the de-
crees, if that exception was recorded in the Acts of
the Council, otherwise not. After some objection,
on the part of the apostolic legate, to the wording of
the exception in the form in which I first offered it,
he consented to my request. But inasmuch as no
change was made in the mode of transacting busi-
ness in the Council, I abstained thenceforth from
voting, except once or twice when my opinion was
called for.

In the published acts of the Council my excep-

Vatican Council. O

170 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

tion is not to be found — whether the apostolic legate
had allowed himself this liberty, or whether, perad-
venture, he had been advised to it from higher quar-
ters. For in the Acts, after it is reported that the
decree offered by me was rejected, the record reads
thus :

" The metropolitan of St. Louis offered a protest
which the most reverend apostolic legate ordered to
be reported in the Acts, and which has been trans-
mitted with them to the holy pontiff, p. 72."

In this way it has been brought about that the
exception itself has been omitted, and T am made to
appear as taking exception to the rejection of the
decree which I had proposed, which would have
been too ridiculous; when my exception was against
the method of transacting business, which seemed to
me not conciliar. My complaint is that the faith
pledged to me was not kept. The Acts ought either
to have been suppressed, or to have been given
entire.

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENKICK. 171

APPENDIX B.

[SEE PAGE 164.]

Out of the four committees, only that which is
called the Committee on the Faith [Deputatio de
Fide] has thus far clone anything in the Council. It
is composed of twenty-four bishops, elected by the
Council. Some days before the election, printed
lithograph tickets, headed with the inscription, "In
Honor of the Blessed Virgin of the Immaculate Con-
ception" were distributed among the fathers, the
name of His Eminence Cardinal De Angelis being
quoted by the persons who ran these tickets, in a
sort of recommendation of them. The bishops put
in nomination by the pious getters-up of these tick-
ets were almost to a man selected from those who
were. known not to be opposed to the definition of
papal infallibility.

According to the Apostolic Constitution Midtipli-
ces inter, the duty of the committees was this: In
case the schemata first presented were either unac-
ceptable to the fathers, or in want of some correc-
tion on which the fathers in general congregation
could not agree, they were to be recommitted to the
committee either for correction or for reconstruction,
in view of the remarks of the fathers upon it. In
the General Congregation itself, the committee had
no duty intrusted to it, although its individual mem-
bers were at liberty to express their own views,
speaking each for himself and not for the committee.

172 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Of the committee's method of doing business in
its own meetings, . I cannot speak with certainty.
But I have heard that when the question was on
reconstructing the first schema De Fide, the work
of preparing the new draft was committed by the
others to three bishops, who were undoubtedly aided
in their work by the advising theologians of the com-
mittee. So that it is not very rash to suppose that
the work of reconstruction was, at least mainly, to
be referred to those theologians. Doubtless the rest
gave their approval; and perhaps they had some
share in the work.

As to the committee's way of doing business in
the Council itself, I can speak with more confidence.
It was on this wise: In every other deliberative
assembly, the committee, after reporting the amend-
ed bill, has nothing more to do in the assembly, ex-
cept, as has already been said, that the individuals
of the committee are to state their views and give
their votes just like other members of the body.
Just the contrary has been done. By virtue of the
ninth rule of the Decree, uttered in the month of
February — not by the Council, but by the pope — it
was permitted to any member of the committee to
take the floor in answer to objections against the
schema, either on the day they were offered, or on
the next day. So it has come about that ahnost
every day, at the beginning of the General Congre-
gation, some one of the fathers of the committee,
not in his own name, but in that of the committee, is
accustomed to make a speech under the pretext of

SPEECH OF ARCHBISHOP KENRICK. 173

replying to objections, (though these very rarely are
replied to,) but as a matter of fact, in hopes of help-
ing on the schema by arguments from every quarter,
and so of lessening the force of the objections by
making a show of them to the unwary, as if they had
been answered. Before reaching the preliminary
voting, when the question was to be taken on the
several amendments offered by some of the bishops,
one of the bishops of the committee, called the rela-
tor, mounts the platform to inform the fathers what
the committee thinks of this and that amendment;
adding after each amendment the words: "This
amendment the committee accepts," or " rejects," or
"thinks that with some verbal changes it may be
accepted." After this "relation" has been finished,
the reverend monsignor the sub-secretary of the
Council puts the amendments to vote separately
(giving the number of the amendment, and announ-
cing the first words of it in this fashion : " This
amendment is accepted by tlue committee" or "is reject-
ed" or "is thus modified. All those who are in favor
of adopting it will rise;" then, "All those who are
in favor of rejecting it will rise." It has always
happened that the fathers have voted in agreement
with the views of the committee. On the first day
of the voting, when the question was taken on the
third part of the first amendment, the signal not hav-
ing yet been used by the sub-secretary as it has constant-
ly been since, & large number of persons rose, so that
those standing had to be counted in order to come at
the vote. Then there began to be a great confusion,

174 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and the amendment, although perhaps adopted by
the majority, was postponed till the next day. When
the next day came, the right reverend relator warned
the fathers from the platform that the committee
would not accept that amendment. At once, almost
all voted by rising to reject it; only a few (as it
commonly happens in such circumstances) voting to
adopt it, and that rather to show their own mind
than with the hope of accomplishing anything.

Thus, in point of fact, the committee is the Coun-
cil. The Council hangs upon its nod, and follows its
dictation in everything. The committee, in turn, is
governed by the theologians, in this sense, at least,
that it makes their will its own.

In a speech lately made by one of the right rev-
erend relators, Liberal Catholics are numbered among
the enemies of the Holy See; although the relator
himself — who belongs to a race who for six hundred
years have, till now, been impatient of slavery — well
knew that there were some among the bishops who
go by that name because they believe that there is
some middle course to be found between absolutism
and utter license.

PllETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 175

CHAPTEK VIII.

PRETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP IN
THE COUNCIL."

Soon after the close of the Council, a little pamphlet
was widely circulated in Italy, under the title, " The
Speech of a Bishop in the Vatican Council" It was so
bold and fearless in its tone and temper, that its genu-
ineness was doubted by many of those who knew the
intolerance of free speech on the part of the majority
in the Council, and the arbitrary use of the president's
bell. Nevertheless, by many eminent Koman-catholics
in Europe, who knew of the extraordinary boldness,
both of thought and speech, exhibited in the Council
by the Croat bishop, Strossmayer, and the violent clam-
ors which he had resolutely faced, it was believed to
be the genuine speech of that great Latin orator ; and
as such was published in America in an English trans-
lation. Subsequently it was disavowed in the name of
Strossmayer, and the disavowal was promptly given to
the public through the same journals which had circu-
lated the speech.

We print this document here as apocryphal indeed,
but as a part of the literature relating to the Council,
and an effective argument on the main question before
that body ; while we reprobate the false pretence under

which it was originally published.*
>

* It is only fair to remember that the writer, as a Koman-cath-
olic, had been trained in a system which justifies such things. See
above, pp, 7, 8, 10. Many of what are charged as "Protestant
frauds " have a Komish origin ; e. g., the Pope Joan story and the
"Secret Instructions of the Jesuits."

17G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Venerable Fathers and Brethren : It is not without
some tremors, although with a conscience free and
tranquil before the living and heart-searching God,
that I rise to address this august assembly.

Sitting here among you, I have followed with close
attention all the ;ul<livsses made in this hall, witli fer-
vent longings that some ray of light from above might
illumine the eyes of my understanding, and qualify me
to vote on the canons of this holy (Ecumenical Council
with a perfect comprehension of the case.

Impressed by the responsibilities resting upon me,
and for which God will call me to account, I have
devoted myself with the most serious attention to
studying the Scriptures of the Old and N-
ments, demanding of these venerable monuments of
the truth to inform me whether the holy pontiff who
presides over us is really the successor of St. Peter, the
vicar of Jesus Christ, and the infallible teacher of the
church.

To solve this grave question, I have had to turn
away from the existing state of things, and with the
gospel torch in hand to transport myself mentally to
the time when neither gallicanism nor ultramontanism
was known ; when the church had for teachers St.
Paul and St. Peter, St. James and St. John — teachers
whose divine authentication we cannot deny without
calling in question what is taught by the Holy Bible,
which here lies before me, and which the Council of
Trent has proclaimed the "rule of faith and of
practice."

TESTIMONY OF GOD'S WOKD.

I open, then, these sacred pages. But what ! shall
I dare to tell it ? I find in them nothing to justify, how-
ever remotely, the ultramontane view. Nay, more ; to

PRETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 171

my utter astonishment, I find nothing said about a
pope, successor of St. Peter and vicar of Jesus Christ,
any more than about a successor of Mohammed, who
was not then in existence.

Yes, Archbishop Manning, you will say that I blas-
pheme ; and you, Bishop Pie, that I am out of my
senses. No, no, my lord bishops, I am not blasphe-
ming ; I am not beside myself. But now, unless I have
failed of reading the New Testament from beginning to
end, I declare to you before God, lifting my hand tow-
ards yonder great crucifix, that I find in its pages no

TRACE OF THE PAPACY aS it UOW exists.

Do not refuse to listen to me, venerable brethren.
Do not by your murmurs and interruptions justify
those who declare, with Father Hyacinthe, that this
Council is not free, but that our votes are imposed
upon us in advance. If this were so, this august
assembly, towards which the eyes of the whole world
are turned, would fall into the most shameful contempt.
If we would be great, we must be free.

Reading, then, the Scriptures, with such attention
as the Lord has made me capable of, I have not found
in them a single chapter, a single verse, in which Jesus
Christ commits to St. Peter lordship over the apostles,
his fellow-laborers.

If Simon, son of Jonas, had been appointed to be
what we understand His Holiness Pius IX. to be in
our time, it is astonishing that Christ did not say to
the apostles, " When I am ascended up to my Father,
ye shall all obey Simon Peter as ye have obeyed me. I
appoint him my vicar upon earth."

Not only is Christ silent on this point, but he has
so little thought of giving the church a chief, that when
he is promising thrones to his apostles, to judge the

8*

178 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

twelve tribes of Israel, he promises twelve of them —
one apiece — without saying that one is to be higher
than the rest, and is to belong to Peter. Matt. 19 : 28.
Surely, if he had wished this to be so, he would have
said so. What must we infer from his silence ? Logic
tells us : Christ did not intend to make Peter chief of
the apostolic college.

When Christ sent forth the apostles to the conquest
of the world, he gave to all alike the power of binding and
loosing ; to all, the promise of the Holy Ghost. Let
me repeat it : if he had meant to make Peter his vicar,
he would have appointed him commander-in-chief of
his spiritual army.

Christ, says the Scriptures, forbade Peter and his
colleagues to have rule and lordship and power over
believers, like the princes of the Gentiles. Luke 22 : 25.
If Peter had been made pope, Jesus would not have
spoken thus ; for, according to our traditions, the
papacy holds in its hands two swords, the symbols of
spiritual and of temporal power.

One fact has profoundly impressed me. When I
observed it, I said to myself : If Peter had been pope,
would his colleagues have suffered themselves to send
him with St. John to Samaria to preach the gospel of
the Son of God? Acts 8:14.

What would you think, venerable brethren, if at
tins moment we were to permit ourselves to depute His
Holiness Pius IX. and His Eminence Monsignor Plan-
tier to betake themselves to the patriarch of Constan-
tinople, and adjure him to put an end to the Eastern
schism ?

But here is another fact of greater importance still.
An oecumenical council was assembled at Jerusalem to
decide on questions on which believers were divided.

PKETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 179

"Who would have convoked this council if St. Peter had
been pope? St. Peter. Who would have presided
over it ? St. Peter or his legates. Who would have
formulated and promulgated its canons? St. Peter.
"Well, now, nothing of the kind took place. The apostle
was present at the council, like all his colleagues. But
it was not he who framed its conclusions, but St.
James ; and when its decrees were promulgated, this
was done in the name of "the apostles, the elders, and
the brethren." Acts 15. Is this the way we manage
things in our church ?

The deeper I go, my venerable brethren, in my
examination, the more I am convinced that in the
Holy Scriptures there is no appearance of the primacy
of the son of Jonas.

"While we teach that the church is built on St. Peter,
St. Paul, whose authority cannot be questioned, tells
us in his epistle to the Ephesians (2:20) that it is
" built upon the foundation of the apostles and proph-
ets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone."
The same apostle is so far from believing in the
supremacy of Peter, that he openly rebukes those who
say, "I am of Paul and I of Apollos," 1 Cor. 1:12, in
the same terms as those who would say, "I am of
Peter." If, then, the latter apostle was vicar of Jesus
Christ, St. Paul would have taken good care not to
censure so violently those who held to his colleague.

The same apostle Paul, enumerating the offices of
the church, mentions apostles, prophets, evangelists,
pastors, and teachers. Is it credible, venerable breth-
ren, that St. Paul, the great teacher of the Gentiles,
would have left out the greatest of all the offices — the
papacy — if the papacy had been founded by divine
institution ? It seems to me that this omission would

180 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

have been no more possible than a history of this coun-
cil that should make no mention whatever of His
Holiness Pius IX.

The apostle Paul in not one of his letters addri
to the various churches makes ;iny mention of the
primacy of Peter. If this primacy had exist d ; if, in
short, the church bad had a supreme head, infallible in
teaching, would the great teacher of the Gentiles have
omitted all mention of it ? Nay. He would have writ-
ten a long epistle on this important, this vital subject.
"When, therefore, he is rearing the edifice of Christian
doctrine, is it possible that he leaves out the foundation
and the key-stone? Now, unless the apostolic church
is to be reckoned heretical, which we neither wish nor
dare to say, we are constrained to acknowledge that
the church has never been more fair, more pure, nor
more holy, than in the days when it had no pope.

My lord bishop of Laval cannot contradict this ; for
if any of you, venerable brethren, should dare to think
that the church which at this day has a pope for its
head is stronger in the faith, or purer in morals, than
the apostolic church, he must say it openly in the face
of the world ; for this room is the centre from which
our words fly from pole to pole.

I proceed : Not in the writings of St. Paul, nor in
those of St. John or St. James, have I found any trace
or germ of the papal power. St. Luke, the historian
of the missionary labors of the apostles, is silent on
this vital point. The silence of these holy men, whose
writings are part of the canon of the inspired Scrip-
tures, is as inexplicable, if Peter had been pope, as that
of Thiers would have been, if he had omitted the title
of Emperor in writing the history of Naj)oleon Bona-
parte.

PRETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 181

But the tiling which astounds me beyond all expres-
sion is the silence of Peter himself. If he had been
what we say — the vicar of Christ upon earth — he must
have known it. If he knew it, how does it#happen
that he never once — not one solitary time — acted as
pope ? He might have done it on the day of Pentecost,
when he pronounced his first discourse ; but he did
not. He might have done it at the Council of Jerusa-
lem ; but he did not. He might have done it at Anti-
och ; but he did not. He might have done it in his
two epistles to the churches ; but he did not. Can you
imagine such a pope as this, O my venerable breth-
ren?

If, then, we would maintain that Peter was pope, it
necessarily follows that we must maintain that he was
not aware of it at the time. I put it to any man with
a head to think and a mind to reflect, whether these
two suppositions are credible.

To sum up, then : During the lifetime of the apos-
tles, the church never thought of the possibility of a
pope. To maintain the contrary, it would be necessary
to put the Holy Scriptures into the fire or out of the
mind.

But the question is asked, "Was not St. Peter at
Rome? Was he not crucified here head downward?
The chair from which he taught, the altar at which he
said mass, are they not in this Eternal City ?

Venerable brethren, the sojourn of St. Peter at
Rome has no other proof than tradition. But even if
he was bishop of Rome, what argument can be drawn
from his episcopate here to prove his supremacy? A
scholar of the highest rank, Scaliger, has not hesitated
to say that the episcopate and sojourn of St. Peter at
Rome must be classed amon^r ridiculous legends.

182 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHURCH HISTOEY.

But, venerable sirs, we have one dictator before
which we all, even Kis Holiness Pius IX., must needs
bow the head in silence. This dictator is history.

History is not like the legends, which one can mould
at his pleasure as the potter moulds clay ; it is the dia-
mond, cutting on the glass words that cannot be can-
celled. Thus far I have relied solely on the facts of
sacred history ; and if I have found no trace of the
papacy in the days of the apostles, the fault is not
mine but history's. Do you wish to arraign me on a
charge of falsehood ? You are welcome to do so.

Finding no trace of tin- papacy in the apostolic rec-
ords, I said to myself, "I shall find what I am seeking
in the annals of the church." Well, I will say it frank-
ly : I have searched for a pope through the first three
centuries, and have not found one.

No one of you, I hope, will question the authority
of the holy bishop of Hippo, the great and blessed St.
Augustine. #This pious doctor, the honor and glory of
the catholic church, was secretary of the Council of
Milevio. In the decrees of that venerable assembly
we read these significant words : "Whoever shall wish
to appeal to the bishop across the sea, shall not be
received to the communion by any one in Africa." The
African bishops were so far from recognizing any
supremacy of the bishop of Rome, that they judged
worthy of excommunication all who had recourse to
him by appeal.

These same bishops, in the sixth Council of Car-
thage, held under Aurelius, bishop of that city, wrote
to Celestine, bishop of Eome, giving him notice that
he should not receive appeals from bishops, priests, or
clergy of Africa ; that he should send thither neither

PKETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 183

legates nor commissioners ; and that he should not
bring human pride into the church.

That the patriarch of Rome very early formed the
design to gain for himself supreme authority is evi-
dent, but it is equally evident that he did not then pos-
sess the supremacy which the ultramontanists ascribe
to him ; for if he had, how would the African bishops,
and Augustine, above all, have dared to prohibit ap-
peals from their own decrees to his supreme tribunal ?

I readily acknowledge that the patriarchate of Eome ;
held the most prominent position. A law of Justinian \
says : " We ordain, according to the definitions of the i
four councils, thaj: the most holy father of ancient \
Rome be the first among the bishops ; and that the J
most exalted archbishop of Constantinople, the new
Rome, be the second."

You will say to me, " Then bow down to the su-
premacy of the pope." But, venerable brethren, rush
not so hastily to this conclusion ; for this law of Jus-
tinian bears inscribed at its head, " Concerning the
order of the sees of the patriarchs." Now precedence isl
one thing, and power of jurisdiction is another. Thus, J
for example, let us suppose there was an assembly in
Florence of all the bishops of this kingdom ; the prece-
dence would be given to the primate of Florence, as
among the Orientals it is assigned to the patriarch of
Constantinople, and in England to the archbishop of
Canterbury. But neither the first, the second, nor the
third could claim, from the position assigned to him,
any jurisdiction over his colleagues.

The precedence of the Roman bishops was derived/
not from divine right, but from the importance of the\
city in which they were established. My lord Darboyy
of Paris is not superior in dignity to the archbishop of

184 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Avignon ; and yet Paris secures for him a considera-
tion lie would not possess if Lis palace were on the
banks of the Rhone instead of the Seine. "What is true
in the religious order is also true in the civil and polit-
ical order. The prefect of Florence is no more really
a prefect than he of Pisa, but civilly and politically he
has greater influence.

I have said that from the first centuries the patri-
arch of Rome aspired to the universal government of
tin el lurch. Unhappily he succeeded ere long; but
he had not then attained his object, for, notwithstand-
ing his claims, the emperor Theodosius II. made a law
by which he ordained that the patriarch of Constanti-
nople had the same authority as the patriarch of Rome.
Leg. <

The fathers of the Council of Chalcedon placed the
bishops of the "old" and the "new" Rome in the
same order in all things, even in ecclesiastical matters.
Can, 28.

The sixth Council of Carthage prohibited all bishops
from taking the title of "chief of the bishops," or
" supreme bishop."

As to the title of "universal bishop," which the
popes at a later day assumed, St. Gregory I., believing
that his successors would never embellish their names
with it, put on record these notable words : " Not one
of my predecessors has consented to take this profane
title, because, when one patriarch assumes for himself
the title of universal, the name of patriarch suffers dis-
credit. Far, then, from every Christian be the desire
to give himself a title which reflects discredit upon his
brethren."

The words of St. Gregory were intended for his
colleague at Constantinople, who claimed the primacy

PRETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 1S5

of the church. Pope Pelagius II. calls John, the
bishop of Constantinople, who aspired to the supreme
pontificate, "impious" and "profane." "Do not re-
gard," says he, " the title of universal, which John has
unlawfully assumed. Let no one of the patriarchs take
this profane title ; for what misfortunes must we not
expect, if such elements arise among the priests? It
would be a fulfilment of what has been predicted : ' He
is the king of the sons of pride.' " (Pelagius II., let-
ter 13.)

Do not these authorities (and I have a hundred
more just as strong) prove, as clear as the sun at noon-
day, that it was not until a very late date that the
bishops of Eome came to be regarded as universal
bishops and heads of the church ? And, on the other
hand, who does not know that, from the year 325, in
which the first Council of Nice was held, to the year
580, the date of the second Council of Constantinople,
out of the 1,109 bishops who attended the first six
councils, only 19 were occidental bishops? Who is
there but knows that Councils were convoked by the
emperors, without consultation with the bishop of
Eome, and sometimes in opposition to his wishes ?
that Hosius, bishop of Cordova, presided in the first
Council of Nice, and drew up its canons? The same
Hosius presided in the Council of Sardis, to the exclu-
sion of the legates of Julius, bishop of Eome. I will
not press this farther, venerable brethren, but pass on
to the great argument which is alleged in proof of the
primacy of the bishop of Eome.

IS PETER THE ROCK?

By the rock on which the holy church was built, you
understand Peter. If this were true, it would be an

186 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

end to the dispute. But the early fathers, who must
surely have known something about it, did not think
as we do on this point.

St. Cyril, in his fourth book on the Trinity, says :
"I believe that by the rock we ftre to understand the
immovable faith of the apostle** St. Hilary, bishop of
Poictiers, in his second book on the Trinity, says :
" The rock is the blessed and sole rock of the faith, con-
i by the mouth of St. Peter ;" and adds, in his
sixth book on the Trinity : " It is upon this rock of the
confession that the church is built" St. Jerome, in his
sixth book on St. Matthew, says : "God lias founded
his church upon this rock, and it is upon this rock that
the apostle Peter received his name." After him,
Clirysostom says^ in his fifty-third homily 0D St. "Mat-
thew : '"On this rock will I build my church ;' that is,
on the faith of the confession. And what was the
apostle's confession? 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of
the living God.'" Ambrose, the holy archbishop of
Milan, on the second chapter to the Ephesians, St. Ba-
sil of Seleucia, and the fathers of the Council of Chal-
cedon, teach exactly the same thing.

Of all the doctors of Christian antiquity, St. Augus-
tine is the one who holds perhaps the first place for
learning and piety. Hear, then, what he writes in his
second treatise on the first epistle of John : " What
signify the words, ' On this rock will I build my church ' ?
On that faith, on that which is said, 'Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God.' " In his one hun-
dred and twenty-fourth treatise on St. John we find
this most significant sentence : " On this rock which
thou hast confessed, I will build my church, because
Christ was the rock."

So far was this great bishop from believing that the

PRETENDED ''SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 187

church was built on St. Peter, that he said to his peo-
ple in his thirteenth sermon : " Thou art Peter, and on
this rock which thou hast confessed — this rock, which
thou hast acknowledged in declaring, 'Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God' — I will build my
church ; on myself, in that I am the Son of the living-
God, will I build it ; on me, and not me on thee."

St. Augustine's opinion on this famous text was the
opinion of all Christendom in his day.

To sum up, then, I have proved :

1. That Jesus gave to all the apostles the same
power as to Peter.

2. That the apostles never recognized Peter as the
vicar of Jesus Christ and the infallible teacher of the
church.

3. That Peter never thought of being pope, and
never acted as pope.

4. That the councils of the first four centuries,
while acknowledging the high dignity of the bishop of
Rome, conceded to him only a preeminence of honor ;
never of power or jurisdiction.

5. That the holy fathers, in the famous passage,
" Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my
church," never understood that the church was built
upon Peter, (super Petrum,) but on the rock, (super
petram, ) that is, on the apostle's confession of faith.

I conclude triumphantly with history, with reason,
with logic, with common sense, and with Christian
conscience, that Jesus Christ conferred no supremacy
whatever on St. Peter ; and that if the bishops of Rome
have come to be sovereigns of the church, it has only
been by the process of confiscating, one by one, all the
rights of the bishops.

History is neither Catholic, nor Anglican, nor Cal-

188 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

vinist, nor Lutheran, nor Armenian, nor Schismatic-
Greek, nor Ultramontane. It is what it is ; thai is, it
is something mightier than all the decrees of oecumeni-
cal councils.

You may write falsely against it if you dare ; but
you can no more destroy it than you can throw down
the Coliseum by pulling out a brickbat If I have said
anything which history disproves, confront me with
history, and without a moment's hesitation I will make
the amende honorable. Bat be patient awhile, and you
will find that I have not yet said the whole of what I
have undertaken to say, and must say. If the stake
were waiting for me out on the great square of St.
Peter's, I could not be silent ; I should be bound to
go on.

FORMER POPES NOT INFALLIBLE.

Bishop Dupanloup, in his famous Observations on
this Vatican Council, has said, and justly, that if we
declare Pius IX. infallible, we are bound, as a natural
and necessary inference, to hold all his predecessors as
infallible. "Well, now, my venerable brethren, hear
how history lifts up her commanding voice to assure
you that some popes have erred. You will have a good
time protesting and denying, I promise you, in the face
of such facts as these :

Pope Victor, a. d. 192, approved Montanism, and
afterwards condemned it.

Marcellinus, a. d. 296-303, was an idolater. He
entered the temple of Vesta and offered incense to that
goddess. It was an act of weakness, you say ; but I
reply, a vicar of Jesus Christ on the earth may die, but
does not apostatize.

Liberius, a. d. 358, consented to the condemnation

PKETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 189

of Anastasius, and professed Arianism, for the sake of
being recalled from exile and reinstated in his see.

Honorius, a. d. 625, adhered to monothelitism, as
Father Gratry has fully demonstrated.

Gregory I., a. d. 578-590, gives the name antichrist
to any one who assumes the title universal bishop ; and,
on the other hand, Boniface III., a. d. 607, obtains this
title from the parricide emperor Phocas.

Pascal II., a. d. 1088-99, and Eugenius III., a. d.
1145-52, authorized duelling ; Julius II., a. d. 1509, and
Pius IV., a. d. 1560, forbade it.

Eugenius IV., a. d. 1431-39, approved the Council
of Basle and the restoration of the clialice to the
Bohemian church ; Pius II., a. d. 1658, revoked this
concession.

Adrian II., a. d. 867-72, declares civil marriage
valid; Pius VII., a. d. 1800-23, condemns it. Sixtus
V., a. d. 1585-90, publishes an edition of the Bible, and
by a bull recommends its perusal ; which Pius VII.
condemns.

Clement XIV., a. d. 1700-21, abolishes the order
of Jesuits, allowed by Paul III. Pius VII. reestab-
lishes it.

But why resort to proofs so far off ? Has not our
holy father Pius IX., here present, in his bull prescri-
bing rules for the Council in case he should die during
its session, revoked everything in the past that should
contravene his decisions, even were it in the decisions
of his predecessors ? And certainly if Pius IX. has
ever spoken ex cathedra, is it not when from the depths
of his tomb he imposes his own will on the princes of
the church ?

I should never get through, venerable brethren, if I
were to lay before your eyes all the contradictions of

190 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the popes in their teachings. If, then, you proclaim
the infallibility of the present pope, you will be forced
either to prove what is impossible! that the popes have
not contradicted themselves, or to declare that it is
revealed to you by the Holy Ghost, that papal infalli-
bility dates only from the year 1870. AVill you have
the hardihood to do this?

The public may perhaps pass by with indifference
theological questions, the importance of which they do
not apprehend. But however indifferent they may be
to principles, they are not at all indifferent to facte.
Don't be deluded ! If you decree the dogma of papal
infallibility, oftr antagonist! the Protestants will leap
into the breach with all the more boldness, for the fact

that they will have history on their side and again
while we shall have, to oppose to them, nothing but
our negations. What can we say to them, when they
begin to parade before the public the Hue of the bishops
of Rome from Linus down to His Holiness Pius IX. ?

Oh, if they had all been such as Pius IX. we could
beat them all along the line. But, alas, alas ! it is very
different from this !

Pope Vigilius, a. d. 538, bought the papacy from
Belisarius, agent of the emperor Justinian ; though to
be sure he broke his promise and paid nothing. Is
this mode of gaining the tiara canonical ? The second
Council of Chalcedon formally condemned it, for in one
of its canons we read: "The bishop who gains his
bishopric by bribes must lose it and be degraded."

Pope Eugenius IV., a. d. 1145, imitated Vigilius.
St. Bernard, the bright star of that century, rebuked
him thus : " Can you point out to me one man in this
great city of Rome, who would have taken you as pope
unless he had received cither gold or silver ?"'

PKETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 191

Can it be, venerable brethren, that a pope who sets
up his money-changers' table at the temple door is
inspired by the Holy Ghost ? that he has authority to
teach the church infallibly ?

The history of Formosus you know too well to need
that I should deepen its impression on you. Stephen
XI. caused his body to be disentombed, clothed with
pontifical robes, and cast into the Tiber, after he had
cut off from it the fingers with which he had given the
benediction — pronouncing him perjured and illegiti-
mate. He was himself afterwards imprisoned by the
people, poisoned, and strangled ; but behold the due
revenges of time : Romanus, the successor of Stephen,
and after him John X., reestablished the memory of
Formosus !

You will say, "These are fictions, not history."
Fictions, my lords ! Go to the Vatican library and
read Plotinus, the historian of the papacy, and the
annals of Baronius, a. d. 897. They are facts, which we
would gladly cancel, for the honor of the Holy See ;
but when the question is on the decreeing of a dogma
which may occasion a great schism among us, the love
we bear to our venerable mother church — catholic,
apostolic, and Roman — forbids us to be silent. I
proceed :

The learned cardinal Baronius, speaking of the
papal court, says (give attention, venerable brethren, to
these words) : " What was the aspect of Rome at that
time, and how opprobrious, when nobody had power
at Rome but all-prevalent courtesans ! These were the
persons who granted, transferred, took away bishop-
rics ; and, horrible to believe, their lovers, the false
popes, came to be placed on the throne of St. Peter."
Baronius, Anno 912.

192 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

You. reply, "These were false popes, not true."
Very well ; but in that case, venerable brethren, if for
fifty years the Roman See was occupied only by anti-
popes, where will you find the thread of pontifical suc-
cession ? Has the church been able to do without its
chief for a century and B half, and go headless ? Look
at it! The greater part of these anti-popes figure in
the genealogical tree of the papacy ; and certainly they
must have been such men as Baroniufl describes, for
Genebrardus, the great flatterer of the popes, has
dared to say in his chronicles, a. d. 901, "This is an
unfortunate age, since for about one hundred and fifty
years the popefl have entirely fallen away from the
virtue of their predecessors, and have been more like

apostate* than apostles."

I can well understand how the face of the illustrious
Baronius must have been covered with blushes at nar-
rating these facts about the Roman bishops. Speaking
of John XL, a. d. 931, bastard son of Pope Sergius
and Marozia, he wrote these words in his annals : "The
holy church, that is, the Roman church, has had to be
trodden under foot by such a monster !" And John
XII. , elected pope at the age of eighteen, by the influ-
ence of courtesans, was no whit better than his prede-
cessor.

Venerable brethren, I deplore the necessity of stir-
ring up such a slough. I keep silence respecting
Alexander XL, father and lover of Lucretia ; and I
pass by John XXII. , who denied the immortality of the
soul, and was deposed by the holy (Ecumenical Coun-
cil of Constance. Some assert that this council was no
more than a provincial council. And this may be so ;
but if you deny it all authority, to be logically consis-
tent, you must regard the nomination of Martin T.,

PRETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 193

a. d. 1417, as illegitimate. And then, what will become
of the papal succession ? "Will you be able to find its
thread ?

I make no mention of the schisms which have dis-
honored the church. In those disgraceful days the
Eoman See was occupied by two competitors, and
sometimes by three. Which of these was the true
pope ?

To sum up, then : If you declare the infallibility of
the present bishop of Rome, you will be held bound to
prove the infallibility of all his predecessors, without a
single exception. But can you do this, with history
lying open and showing as clear as sunshine that the
popes have erred in their teaching ? Can you do it,
and maintain that popes who were guilty of avarice, of
incest, of murder, of simony, were nevertheless vicars
of Jesus Christ ? Oh, venerable brethren, to maintain
this monstrous thing would be to betray Christ worse
than Judas did. It would be flinging mud in his
face!

Believe me, venerable brethren, you cannot make
history over again. There it stands, and there it will
stand for ever, to protest mightily against the dogma
of papal infallibility. You may proclaim it unanimous-
ly, but you will have to do without one vote, and that
is mine.

The eyes of true believers are upon us ; they look
to us for the remedy of the numberless evils by which
the church is dishonored. Shall we disappoint their
hopes? What account could we give to God, if we
should let slip this solemn opportunity which he has
given us for preserving the integrity of the true faith ?

Let us hold it fast, my brethren ; let us arm our-
selves with a>holy courage ; let us put forth one mighty

Vatican Council. 9

194 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and generous effort ; let us turn to the teachings of the
apostles, for aside from these we have nothing but
error, darkness, and false tradition.

Let us make use of our reason and understanding
by taking the apostles and the prophets as our sole
infallible teachers on that greatest of all questions,
"What shall I do to be saved?" This being decided,
we shall have got the foundation laid for our dogmatic
system.

Setting our feet firmly on the solid and chang<
rock of the Holy Scriptures inspired of God, we will go
boldly forth against the world, and like the ap
Paul, in the presence of the free-thinkers, we will know
nothing but Jesus Christ and him erueilied. AVe will
conquer by the preaching <>t' the I ss of the

cross, as Paul conquere I the orators of Greece and
Rome, and the church of Rome will have its own
glorious '89 !

You may protest, gentlemen, and cry "Anathema!"
but you know perfectly well that you are not protesting
against me, but against the holy apostles, under whose
protection I would that this Council might place the
church. Ah, if bound about with their grave-clothes
they were to come forth from their sepulchres, would
they speak to you in any different strain from mine ?

What answer will you make them, when out of their
writings I tell you that the papacy has departed from
that gospel of the Son of God which they preached
with such courage, and sealed with their generous
blood ? Will you have the hardihood to say to them :
"We prefer to your instructions those of our popes,
our Bellarmines, our Ignatius Loyolas? No, no! a
thousand times no ! unless you have closed your ears
that you may not hear, and blinded your e$res that you

PKETENDED "SPEECH OF A BISHOP." 195

may not see, and made gross your hearts that you may
not understand.

Ah, if He who sitteth in the heavens is disposed to
make heavy his hand on us, as once on Pharaoh, he
has no need to suffer the troops of Garibaldi to drive
us out of the Eternal City ; he need only let us go on
to make Pius IX. a god, as we have made the blessed
Virgin a goddess.

Pause, oh, pause, my venerable brethren, on that
hateful and absurd declivity on which you find your-
selves. Save the church from the shipwreck that
threatens her, by seeking in the Holy Scriptures alone
the rule of faith which we must believe and profess.

I have spoken. God be my helper !

196 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHA PTEB IX.

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL.

The Council, not yet formally concluded, but to all
intents and purposes defunct, has left as a legacy to
the Roman-catholic church, besides a history of scan-
dals, and the hidden seeds of discord and weakness,
two documents under the title of "Dogmatic Constitu-
tions."

The first of these, entitled " Dogmatic Constitution
on the Catholic Faith," is of small consequence in
ecclesiastical history, inasmuch as it treats, under four
heads, of matters on which there was little difference
among those who were likely to be affected by the
authority from which it proceeded. The Roman-cath-
olics did not need it, and the atheists, pantheists, and
heretics against whom it was levelled were sure to pay
no attention to it. It is sufficient to the purpose of
this volume, omitting the verbose periods of the " con-
stitution," to give the four chapters of Canons in which
the substance of the constitution is briefly summed up
negatively in the form of curses against the contrary
errors.

CANONS ON THE CATHOLIC FAITH.

I. OF GOD THE CEEATOE OF ALL THINGS.

1. If any one shall deny one true God, Creator and
Lord of things visible and invisible ; let him be anath-
ema.

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 197

2. If any one shall not be ashamed to amrni that
nothing exists except matter ; let him be anathema.

3. If any one shall say that the substance and
essence of God and of all things is one and the same ;
let him be anathema.

4. If any one shall say that finite beings, both cor-
poreal and spiritual, or at least spiritual, have emana-
ted from the divine substance ; or that the divine
essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself,
becomes all things ; or lastly, that God is universal or
indefinite being, which by determining itself constitutes
the universality of things, distinct according to genera,
species, and individuals ; let him be anathema.

5. If any one confess not that the world and all
things which are contained in it, both spiritual and
material, have been, in their whole substance, pro-
duced by God out of nothing ; or shall say that God
created, not by his will, free from all necessity, but by
a necessity equal to that whereby he loves himself ; or
shall deny that the world was made for the glory of
God ; let him be anathema.

I II. OF REVELATION,

1. If any one shall say that the one true God, our
Creator and Lord, cannot be certainly known by the
natural light of human reason through created things ;
let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that it is impossible or in-
expedient that man should be taught by divine revolu-
tion concerning God and the worship to be paid to
him ; let him be anathema.

3. If any one shall say that man cannot be raised
by divine power to a higher than natural knowledge
and perfection, but can and ought, by a continuous

198 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

progress, to arrive at length, of himself, to the pos-
session of all that is true and good ; let him be
anathema.

4. If anyone shall not receive as Bacred and canon-
ical the books of Holy Scripture, entire with all their
parts, as the holy Synod of Trent has enumerated them,*
or shall deny that they have been divinely inspired ; let
him be anathema.

III. OF FAITH.

1. If any one shall say that human reason is so
independent that faith cannot be enjoined niton it by
God ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that divine faith is not dis-
tinguished from natural knowledge of God and of moral
truths, and therefore that it is not requisite tor divine
faith that revealed truth be believed because of the
authority of God who reveals it ; let him be anathema.

3. If any one shall say that divine revelation can-
not be made credible by outward signs, and therefore
that men ought to be moved to faith solely by the inter-
nal experience of each, or by private inspiration ; let
him be anathema.

4. If any one shall say that miracles are impossible,
and therefore that all the accounts regarding them,
even those contained in holy Scripture, are to be dis-
missed as fabulous or mythical ; or that miracles can
never be known with certainty, and that the divine ori-
gin of Christianity cannot be proved by them ; let him
be anathema.

5. If any one shall say that the assent of Christian
faith is not a free act, but is inevitably produced by the
arguments of human reason ; or that the grace of God

[* This enumeration includes the Apocrypha.]

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 199

is necessary for that living faith only which worketh
by charity ; let him be anathema.

6. If any one shall say that the condition of the
faithful, and of those who have not yet attained to the
only true faith, is on a par, so that Catholics may have
just cause for doubting, with suspended assent, the
faith which they have already received under the magis-
terium of the church, until they shall have obtained a
scientific demonstration of the credibility and truth of
their faith ; let him be anathema.

IV. OF FAITH AND REASON.

1. If any one shall say that in divine revelation
there are no mysteries, truly and properly so called,
but that all the doctrines of faith can be understood
and demonstrated from natural principles, by properly
cultivated reason ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that human sciences are to
be so freely treated that their assertions, although
opposed to revealed doctrine, are to be held as true,
and cannot be condemned by the church ; let him be
anathema.

3. If any one shall assert it to be possible that
sometimes, according to the progress of science, a sense
is to be given to doctrines propounded by the church
other than what it has understood and understands ;
let him be anathema.

Therefore we,* fulfilling the duty of our supreme
pastoral office, entreat by the mercies of Jesus Christ,
and by the authority of the same our God and Saviour
we command, all the faithful of Christ, and especially
those who are set over others, or are charged with the
office of instruction, that they earnestly and diligently

* That is, the pope, ' ' with the approval of the holy Council. "

200 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

apply themselves to ward off and eliminate these errors
from the church, and to spread the light of pure faith.
And since it is not sufficient to shun heretical prav-
ity, unless those errors also be diligently avoided which
more or less nearly approach it, we admonish all men
of the further duty of observing those constitutions
and decrees by which such erroneous opinions as are
not here specifically enumerated, have been proscribed
and condemned by this Holy See.*

The other constitution adopted, by the Council
bears the title, u Firti Dogmatic Constitution on the
Church <>/' Christ."

After a page or two of preamble, begins the first
chapter, entitled, " Of the. Institution <>/ the Apostolic

Primacy in Bl r," which " teaches and declares

that according to the testimony of the gospel, the pri-
macy of jurisdiction over the universal church of God
was immediately and directly promised and given to
blessed Peter the apostle, by Christ the Lord." The
page of scriptural argument with which this proposi-
tion is sustained it is unimportant to produce, inas-
much as the Council claims infallibility only in the d< >g-
mas it enunciates, and not at all in the reasons it gives
for them. Confessedly, the arguments by which it sup-
ports its infallible dogmas may be every one of them
fallacious ;f and inasmuch as in the present case they
have been refuted in advance in the speech of Arch-
bishop Kenrick,J it would be idle to transcribe them.

[* This concluding paragraph is the one insidiously appended
to the constitution "just to round it off handsomely," and after-
wards treacherously claimed as a concession of infallibility. See
above, pp. 83, 163.]

\ See Archbishop Kenrick, above, p. 135.
% See pp. 105-120. For the full text of these Constitutions,

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 201

For the same reason, Chapter II., "On the Perpetuity of
the Primacy of Blessed Peter in the Rowan Pontiffs," may
be quoted "by its title only." We come to the real
work of the Council only when we reach the last two
chapters, which are as follows :

CHAPTEE III.

ON THE POWER AND NATURE OF THE PRIMACY OF THE
ROMAN PONTIFF.

Wherefore, resting on plain testimonies of the
sacred Scriptures, and adhering to the plain and ex-
press decrees both of our predecessors, the Roman pon-
tiffs, and of the General Councils, we renew the defini-
tion of the (Ecumenical Council of Florence, in virtue
of which all the faithful of Christ must believe that the
holy apostolical see and the Roman pontiff possesses
the primacy over the whole world, and that the Roman
pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, prince of the
apostles, and is true vicar of Christ, and head of the
whole church, and father and teacher of all Christians ;
and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter
to rule, feed, and govern the universal church by Jesus
Christ our Lord ; as is also contained in the acts of the
General Council and in the sacred Canons.

Hence we teach and declare that by the appoint-
ment of our Lord the Roman church possesses a supe-
riority of ordinary power over all other churches, and
that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman pontiff,
which is truly episcopal, is immediate ; to which all, of
whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful,
both individually and collectively, are bound, by their
duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience,

in Latin unci English, see Abp. Manning's Petri PrivUec/ium, 3.
182-210.

9*

202 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith
and morals, but also in those that appertain to the
discipline and government of the church throughout
the world, so that the church of Christ may be one
flock under one supreme pastor, through the preserva-
tion of unity both of communion and of profession of
the same faith with the Koman pontiff. This is the
teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can de-
viate without loss of faith and of salvation.

But so far is this power of the supreme pontiff from
being any prejudice to the ordinary and immediate
power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who
have been set by the Holy Ghost to succeed and hold
the place of the apostles, feed and govern each his own
flock, as true pastors, that this their episcopal author-
ity is really asserted, strengthened, and protected by
the supreme and universal pastor; in accordance with
the words of St. Gregory the Great : "My honor is
the honor of the whole church. My honor is the firm
strength of my brethren. I am truly honored when
the honor due.to each and all is not withheld."* *

Further, from this supreme power possessed by the
Roman pontiff of governing the universal church, it
follows that he has t]^e right of free communication

* Letters of St Gregory the Great, book 8. 30, vol. 2, p. 919,
Benedictine edition, Paris, 1705. [The disclaimer in this para-
graph was plainly intended as a salve for the soreness of those
bishops who had protested against this statement of the supreme
and immediate jurisdiction of the pope in all dioceses, as being
destructive of the dignity and almost of the function of the bish-
ops. It was much to concede to him the supreme mediate jurisdic-
tion, reaching the priests and laity through the medium of the
bishop. But to concede to him the right of governing the priests
and laity directly, over the head of the bishop, through legates
and vicars apostolic, was to concede everything ; and well deserved
to be repaid, at least with a few such civil words.]

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 203

with the pastors of the whole church, and with their
flocks, that these may be taught and ruled by him in
the way of salvation. "Wherefore we condemn and
reject the opinions of those who hold that the commu-
nication between this supreme head and the pastors
and their flocks may lawfully be impeded ; or who
make this communication subject to the secular power,
so as to maintain that whatever is done by the apos-
tolic see or by its authority, for the government of the
church, cannot have force or value unless it be con-
firmed by the assent of the secular power. And since,
by the divine right of apostolic primacy, the Roman
pontiff is placed over the universal church, we further
teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the
faithful,* and that in all cases the decision of which
belongs to the church recourse may be had to this tri-
bunal, f and that none may reopen the judgment of
the apostolic see, than whose authority there is no
greater, nor can any lawfully review its judgment. J
Wherefore they err from the right course who assert
that it is lawful to appeal* from the judgments of the
Roman pontiffs to an (Ecumenical Council as to an
authority higher than that of the Roman pontiff.

* Brief of Pius VI., Super soliditate, of November 28, 1786.

f Acts of the Fourteenth General Council, (Second of Lyons,)
a. d. 1274. •

X Letter VIII. of Pope Nicholas L, a. d. 858, to the Emperor
Michael. [It is under this principle that the Roman-catholic
church, which now ostentatiously disclaims the right which it for-
merly as distinctly claimed, of attempting the overthrow of a sec-
ular government by releasing its subjects from their oath of alle-
giance, may, when the occasion arises, reach the same end by de-
ciding that the oath is no longer binding and allegiance no longer
due. The next paragraph, which declares the pope's sovereignty
to extend not only to faith, but to morals, does (as this word is
constantly used by Roman-catholic writers) expressly assert that
the decision of such political questions belongs to the pope. ]

204 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

If then any shall say that the Roman pontiff has
the office merely of inspection or direction, and not
full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the univer-
sal church, not only in things which belong to faith
and morals, but also in those which relate to the disci-
pline and government of the church spread throughout
the world ; or assert that he possesses merely the prin-
cipal part and not all the fullness of this supreme
power ; or that this power is not ordinary and imme-
diate, both over each and all the churches, and over
each and all the pastors and the faithful ; let him be
anathema.

CHAPTEB IV.

CONCERNING THi: IMALl.ir.I.r. TEACHING OF the
ROMAN PONTIFF.

Moreover, that the supreme power of teaching is
also included in the apostolic primacy which the Roman
pontiff, as the successor of Peter, prince of the apos-
tles, possesses over the whole church, this holy see has
always held, the perpetual practice of the church con-
firms, and (Ecumenical Councils also have declared,
especially those in which the East with the West met
in the union of faith and charity. For the fathers of
the Fourth Council of Constantinople, following in the
footsteps of their predecessors, gave forth this solemn
profession : The first condition of salvation is to keep
the rule of the true faith.* And because the sentence
of our Lord Jesus Christ cannot be passed by, who
said, " Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build

[* This passage illustrates how closely the whole fabric of the
Romish system is connected with that primary perversion which
Archbishop Kenrick so well exposes in his Speech, pp. 99-101 ;
the perversion of the word "faith" from its evangelical meaning
of trust, to signify the acceptance .of dogmas.]

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 205

my church," Matt. 16 : 18, these things which have
been said are approved by events, because in the apos-
tolic see the Catholic religion and her holy and well-
known doctrine have always been kept undefiled. De-
siring, therefore, not to be in the least degree separated
from the faith and doctrine of that see, we hope that
we may deserve to be in the one communion which the
apostolic see preaches, in which is the entire and true
solidity of the Christian religion.* And, with the
approval of the Second Council of Lyons, the Greeks
professed that the Holy Roman Church enjoys supreme
and full primacy and preeminence over the whole
Catholic church, which it truly and humbly acknowl-
edges that it has received with the plenitude of power
from our Lord himself in the person of blessed Peter,
prince or head of the apostles, whose successor the
Roman pontiff is ; and as the a£>ostolic see is bound
before all others to defend the truth of faith, so also if
any questions regarding faith sjiall arise they must be
denned by its judgment. Finally, the Council of Flor-
ence defined : That the Roman pontiff is the true vicar
of Christ, and the head of the whole church and the
father and teacher of all Christians ; and that to him
in blessed Peter was delivered by our Lord Jesus Christ
the full power of feeding, ruling, and governing the
whole church.

To satisfy this pastoral duty our predecessors ever
made unwearied efforts that the salutary doctrine of
Christ might be propagated among all the nations of
the earth, and with equal care watched that it might
be preserved genuine and pure where it had been re-
ceived. Therefore the bishops of the whole world,

° Formula of St. Hormisdas, subscribed by the fathers of the
Eighth General Council, (Fourth of Constantinople,) a. d. 8G9.

9M THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

now singly, now assembled in synod, following the long
established custom of churches and the form of the
ancient rule, sent word to this apostolic see of those
dangers especially which sprang up in matters of faith,
that there the losses of faith might be most effectually
repaired where the faith cannot fail.* And the Roman
pontiffs, according to the exigencies of times and cir-
cumstances, sometinus assembling (Ecumenical Coun-
cils, or asking for the mind of the church scattered
throughout tin; world, sometimes by particular synods,
sometimes using other helps which divine Providence
supplied, denned as to be held those things which with
the help of God they had recognized as conformable
with the sacred Scriptures and apostolic traditions.
For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors
of Peter thai by His revelation they might make known
new doctrines, but that by his ce they might

inviolably keep and faithfully expound the revelation or
deposit of faith delivered through the apostles. And
indeed all the venerable fathers have embraced, and
the holy orthodox doctors have venerated and followed
their apostolic doctrine ; knowing most fully that this
see of holy Peter remains ever free from all blemish of
error according to the divine promise of the Lord our
Saviour made to the prince of his disciples : "I have
prayed for thee that thy faith fail not, and, when thou
art converted, confirm thy brethren."

This gift, then, of truth and never-failing faith was
conferred by heaven upon Peter and his successors in
this chair, that they might perform their high office for
the salvation of all ; that the whole flock of Christ,
kept away by them from the poisonous food of error,
might be nourished with the pasture of heavenly doc-
* Letter of St. Bernard to Pope Innocent II.

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 207

trine ; that the occasion of schism being removed, the
whole church might be kept one, and, resting on its
foundation, might stand firm against the gates of
heU.

But since in this very age, in which the salutary
efficacy of the apostolic office is most of all required,
not a few are found who take away from its authority,
we judge it altogether necessary solemnly to assert the
prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God vouch-
safed to join with the supreme pastoral office.

Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition re-
ceived from the beginning of the Christian faith, for
the glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of the
Catholic religion, and the salvation of Christian peo-
ple, the sacred Council approving, we teach and define
that it is a dogma divinely revealed : that the Roman
pontiff, when he speaks ex catkedrb, that is, when in
discharge of the office of pastor and teacher of all
Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic author-
ity he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to
be held by the universal church,* by the divine assist-
ance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of
that infallibility with which the divine Kedeemer willed
that his church should be endowed for defining doc-
trine, faith, or morals ; and that therefore such defini-
tions of the Roman pontiff are irreformable of them-
selves, and not from the consent of the church.

[* These various limitations are equivalent (as Bishop Dupan-
loup has suggested in his Farewell Letter — Appendix to Father
Hyacinthe's Discourses, vol. 2) to a definition of the fallibility of
the pope on all other occasions than those of ex cathedra utterance.
For instance, while the decree certifies that the insolent bull Unam
Sanctum, which claims for the pope secular supremacy over all
civil governments, (see above, p. 125,) is infallible and irreformable,
i( .virtually warns us that the Allocution addressed to certain eccla-

208 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

But if any one — which may God avert — presume to
contradict this our definition ; let him be anathema.

The work of examining and comparing the enor-
mous series of papal document 1 and genuine,
to see which of them come within the terms of infalli-
bility, is a work yet to be executed by scholars, 3

terms have been fixed with caution, in order to exclude
the notoriously heretical teachings of certain of the ear-
lier popes, as Honorius and Libcrius. According to

siastics by Pius IX. in July or August, 1871, in whichhe distinctly
repudiate! the doctrine of U poken by him as

a mere man, and is not in the least to In- busted Speaking in this
Allocution "as a private doctor," and then for.' I'alliUy, ho claims
that the overthrow of governments by popes was never atti

under the pretence of a divine right, hut only by virtue of the pub-
tie law and usage of li and that the contrary statement
is an Ugly calumny, designed to em1 relations of the
Holy See with civil governments.

The claim is a timid tergiversation, extorted hy the threatening
posture of events, and quite unworthy the author of the Syllabus.
Another private doctor, whose authority far outweighs that of Dr.
Mastai-Ferretti, to wit, Dr. Orestes A. Brownson, declares that " the
power she [the church] exercised over sovereigns in the middle
ages was not a usurpation, was not derived from the concessions
of princes or the consent of the people, but it was and is hers by
ight; and whoso resists it rebels against the King of kings."
.... "All history fails to show an instance in which the pope, in
deposing a temporal sovereign, professes to do it by the authority
vested in him by the pious belief of the faithful, generally-received
maxims, the opinion of the age, the concessions of sovereigns, or
the civil constitution and public laws of Catholic states. On the
contrary, he always claims to do it by the authority committed to
him as the successor of the prince of the apostles .... by the
authority of Almighty God." . . . "Either the popes usurped the
authority they exercised over sovereigns in the middle ages, or
they possessed it by virtue of their title as vicars of Jesus Christ
on earth." Brownson's Quarterly Review, April, 1854. See the
quotation more in full at p. 583 of a convenient book of reference,
"Romanism as it Is," by Rev. S. W. Barnum, Hartford, 1871.]

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 209

some Catholic scholars, no document of all the first
twelve centuries of church history bears this charac-
ter.* But according to others, of equal authority,
there are instances of ex cathedra teaching as far back
as the age of Cyprian and Pope St. Stephen, f The best
that can be said is that it is still left by the Council a
doubtful question, and probably one that can never be
fully settled without a special papal revelation, what
documents are to be reckoned as belonging to the new
Bible of the Roman-catholic church.

Four, however, of those which are most distinctly
certified to the public, under the terms of the Vatican
dogma, as infallible and "irreformable," demand atten-
tion.

I. The first is the bull Unam Sanctam addressed to
the whole Christian world in the year 1302, by Boni-
face VIII. , which teaches "that there are in the church
and in its power two swords, the spiritual and the tem-
poral : that it belongs to the spiritual power to estab-
lish the temporal and to judge it when it is in the
wrong ; so that if the secular power goes astray it is
to be judged by the spiritual power ; if the inferior
spiritual power errs, it is to be judged by the higher ;
but if the supreme spiritual power errs, it can be judged
by God only, and not by man ; and that this supreme
authority, not human, but divine, is vested in Peter and

* Quirinus, p. 131.

t See the long Latin tractate by Bishop Ketteler of Mayence,
entitled " Quwstio" in Documenta ad lllustrandum Concilium Vati-
canum. Speaking of the pope's letter to Cyprian on the rebaptism
of those baptized by heretics, the bishop (now a fierce adherent of
infallibility) remarks : " If .there is any such thing as a definition
ex cathedrd, this was one," and then proceeds to show that instead
of being deferred to as infallible or even authoritative, it was op-
posed with all his might by that apostle of the authority of the
Roman see, St. Cyprian himself. Pp. 39, 40.

210 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

his successors ; and that every human creature is sub-
ject to the pope by reason of sin."*

II. Paul IV. issued with peculiar solemnity, and
directly ex cathalra, his bull Gum ex Apostclatus officio.^
He had consulted his cardinals, and obtained their
signatures to it, and then defined, "out of the pleni-
tude of his apostolic power," the following proposi-
tions :

(1.) The pope, who as "Pontifex Maximus" is
God's representative on earth, has full authority and
power over nations and kingdoms ; he judges all, and
can in this world be judged by none.

(2.) All princes and monarchs, as well as bishops,
as soon as they fall into heresy or schism, without the
need of any legal formality, arc irrevocably deposed,
deprived for ever of all rights of government, and incur
sentence of death.

(3.) None1 may venture to give any aid to an heret-
ical or sehismatical prince, not even the mere services
of common humanity ; any monarch who does so for-
feits his doroinions and property, which lapse to princes
obedient tojthe pope, on their gaining possession of
them. . . . JV.

Such is this most solemn declaration, issued as late
as 1558, subscribed by the cardinals, and afterwards
expressly confirmed and renewed by Pius V., that the
pope, by virtue of his absolute authority, can depose
every monarch, hand over every country to foreign
invasion, deprive every one of his property, and that
without any legal formality, and not only on account

* See above, in Abp. Kenrick's Speech, p. 125 ; and in "Fou-
voir du Pape au Moyen Age," p. 571. Paris, 1815.

t The account of this bull is abridged from Janus— Pope and
Council— pp. 311, 312, Am. ed.

, THE ACTS OF THE COUNOIL. 211

of dissent from the doctrines approved at Rome, or of
separation from the church, but for merely offering an
asylum for such dissidents, so that no rights of dynasty
or nation are respected, but nations are to be given up
to all the horrors of a war of conquest.

EEL Far graver and more permanent consequences
resulted from the other document,* the bull In Ccena
Domini, which the popes had labored at for centuries,
and which was finally brought out in the pontificate of
Urban VIIL, in 1627. It had appeared first in its
broader outlines under Gregory XL, in 1372. Gregory
XII., in 1411, renewed it, and under Pius V., in 1568,
it preserved its substantial identity, with certain addi-
tions. According to his decision it was to remain as
an eternal law in Christendom, and above all to be im-
posed on bishops, penitentiaries, and confessors, as a
rule they were to impress in the confessional on the
consciences of the faithful. If ever any document bore
the stamp of an ex cathedrh decision, it is this, which
has been over and over again confirmed by so many
popes.

This bull excommunicates and curses .all heretics
and schismatics, as well as all who favtftefcor defend
them — all princes and magistrates, therefore, who allow
the residence of heterodox persaais in their country. It
excommunicates and curses all who keep or print the
books of heretics without papal permission, all — wheth-
er private individuals or universities, or other corpora-
tions— who appeal from a papal decree to a future Gen-
eral Council. It encroaches on the independence and
sovereign rights of* states, in the imposition of taxes,
the exercise of judicial authority, and the punishment
of the crimes of clerics, by threatening with excommu-
* Seo Janus, Pope and Council, 313.

212 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

nication and anathema those who perform such acts
without special papal permission ; and these penalties
fall not only on the supreme authorities of the state,
but on the whole body of civil functionaries, down to
scribes, jailers, and executioners. The pope alone can
absolve from these censures, except in artieiUo mortis. . . .
This bull was annually published in Rome on Maundy-
Thursday for two hundred years and if it has

ceased to be read out on that day, as before, since
Clement XIV. 's time, still it is always treated, as Cre-
tinean-Joly states, in the Roman tribunals and congre-
gations, as having legal force.*

TV. A fourth document on which authority equal to
that of divine inspiration IS now declared to be con-
ferred is the notorious encyclical Quanta Cura, with its
appended Syllabus, This, the chief of the recent utter-
ances of the chair of Peter, has already been transcribed
in full upon the pages of this volume. f But in one,
especially, of its censures, the infallibihty of this docu-
ment is pledged to the vindication of all the monstrous
and hideous usurpations and tyrannies of which the
popes in all past ages have been guilty. The twenty-

* The bull In i 'cunu Domini is quoted by Archbishop Manning
as being in full force at this day, in / . 3. 19, note.

But as if to repudiate in the most unmistakable terms the excuses
otfered by those Roman-catholic apologists in free countries, who
pretend that this " irreformable " and infallible bull has become
obsolete, and that the Romish church has ceased to be a tyranni-
cal and persecuting institution, one of the first acts of the reigning
pope after the assembling of the Council was to fulminate a new
bull, Apostolicce Skdis, '-virtually intended as a renewal or confir-
mation of the bull In Coenu Domini." "Certain excommunications
nobody paid any attention to are dropped out, as, for instance, of
sovereigns and governments who levy taxes without permission of
the pope. But new censures of wider application have come into
their place." Quirinus, 100, 105.

f See above, pp. 22-48.

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 213

third article of the Syllabus stigmatizes as one of "the
principal errors of our time" the statement that "the
Roman pontiffs have exceeded the limits of their power
or usurped the rights of princes."* 'What atrocities
against the rights of man and the liberty of nations
are hereby justified and claimed as within the just
power of the popes for all future time, all history de-
clares.

According to the new dogma, the pope may by
divine right give whole nations into slavery on account
of some measure of their sovereign.

He has the right to make slaves of a foreign nation
merely because they are not Catholics.

He has the right to rob innocent populations, cities,
regions, or countries en masse, with the sole exception
of infants and the dying, of all those services which he
declares essential to salvation, merely because the sov-
ereign or government has violated a papal command
or some right of the "church. f

He has the right to make a present of whole coun-
tries inhabited by non- Christian peoples, and hand over

* See above, p. 39. In the Letter Apostolic Multiplices inter,
here referred to in the Syllabus, this statement is cited as the very-
climax of the horrors contained in the book under censure. " Fi-
nally, not to speak of a multitude of other errors, to such a pitch
of audacity and impiety does he proceed, as to pretend, with nefa-
rious insolence, that popes of Rome and (Ecumenical Councils
have exceeded the limits of their power, and usurped the rights of
princes, and also erred in definitions of faith and morals." fie-
cueil des Allocutions consistoriales, Encycliques, etc., cities dans VEn-
cyclique ct le Syllabus du 8 Dicembre, 1864. Paris, 1865. In this
edition, published by the "printers to the pope," the French
translation is untrustworthy, two significant clauses being sup-
pressed from the single sentence above quoted.

f Pope Clement IV., in 1265, "did not exceed his powers"
when he applied this process to Charles of Anjou, sheerly to en-
force the prompt collection of a debt. Janus, 12.

214 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

all rights of sovereignty and property in them to any
Christian prince he may pin

He has the right to incite princes, by promises of
forgiveness of sins and heaven, to make war on the
enemies of his secular authority.

He lias the right to provide for the Inquisition by
direct and personal legislation of his own, depriving
those accused before the holy office of any advocate to
defend them, authorizing the application of the tor-
ture, obliging the magistrate to carry out the capital
sentences of the Inquisition, prohibiting them to
spare the life of any lapsed heretic, even on his con-
version.

He "does not exceed his powers" in forcibly de-
priving heretics of their children in order that they
may be brought up Catholics.

He "does not exceed his powers" in releashi
his pleasure from oaths of allegiance taken by a people
to their government.

He "does not exceed his powers" in absolving a
sovereign from the treaties he has sworn to observe, or
from his oath to the constitution of his country, or in
giving full power to his confessor to absolve him from
any oath he finds it inconvenient to keep.

He " does not exceed his powers " when he assumes
to dissolve the bond of marriage by declaring one of the
parties to be excommunicated.

The act of Pope Adrian IV., in delivering Ireland
over to that subjection to the English crown from
which it has never escaped, was within the power of
the pope.

And the act of St. Pius V., and of his successor
Sextus V., which excommunicated Queen Elizabeth of
England and invited her assassination, is justified by

THE ACTS OF THE COUNCIL. 215

the Council as an act which it would be right to do
again, under like circumstances.*

* See Quirinus, pp. 634-653. Janus, p. 12. Bishop Dupan-
loup, Appendix to Hyacinthe, vol. 2 ; with the references cited by
each. All these, at the time of writing, were acknowledged Cath-
olic writers.

216 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTEB X.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL.

The outburst of war which followed immediately
upon the promulgation of the new dogma, and drove
the terrified pope and court of Rome to an immediate
prorogation of the Council, was not altogether an un-
toward c\cnt to the Romish church. It swept away
indeed, williin nin< the temporal sovereignty of

the pope, which might otherwise have lasted a few
months or years Longer. But it served to distract the
minds of men from reflecting upon the monstrous act
that had just been performed, and so to delay a little,
and perhaps to mitigate, the inevitable revulsion of
thoughtful minds in the Roman-catholic church from
the " sacrifice of the intellect " which was now demand-
ed of them ;n the much-abused name of Christian faith.
Weeks and months passed by, and the agitations of an
unprecedented political crisis, continued to absorb the
intellectual activity of the world. No very alarming
sounds of protest seemed to be heard from any quar-
ter, and the abettors of the plan for the definition of
infallibility, if perchance they had had at first some
misgivings at the results of the work of their own
hands, plucked up courage again, and made themselves
merry over the forebodings of those who had prophe-
sied damage and loss to the church in consequence of
the definition.

All this time, however, the court of Rome was not
idle.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 217

When, in a political nominating convention, the
more numerous of two factions has carried its point
against the other by the use of expedients appropriate
to that arena — the "previous question," the "suspen-
sion of the two-thirds rule," etc. — and so has accom-
plished by mere majority what, after all, it needs the
"moral unanimity " of the party to make of any avail ;
it becomes necessary, after the adjournment, to insti-
tute measures for conciliating or whipping in the dis-
affected.

The situation of the successful party in the Coun-
cil wras very like this. If the threats made in the
speeches and protests of the minority, and still more
vehemently in their private conversation,* to denounce
the Council as "void of truth and liberty," and to
refuse assent to its decrees on tins ground, f and on the
ground that no conciliar definition could make that to
be true which is not true J — should be carried out by
any considerable number, all the cost and pains that
had been spent in assembling the Council and in for-
cing through it the great schema, would prove to have
been worse than in vain.

The appliances at hand for bringing refractory ec-

* Iu pursuance of the plan of this book, to make no statement
except on the authority of credible documents, we have refrained
from the allegation of many facts which tend to discredit, even to
a Eoman-catholic mind, the authority of the Council, but which
are demonstrated only by private testimony. It is notorious, and
the fact is proved by the concurrent testimony of many inde-
pendent witnesses, that the bishops of the minoritj7 were profuse
iu denunciation of moral and physical constraint, intimidation,
bribery, and corruption, which they declared to have been prac-
tised or attempted by the court of liome in carrying through of its
scheme. The statement in the text is justified by reference to
Quirinus, and Ce qui se passe au Concile, passim.

f See above, pp. 70, 81, 82. % See above, pp. 85, 138.

Vi.tioan Council. 10

218 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

clesiastics to terms of submission were not few. Some-
times they were to be directly summoned to surren-
der, under threat of deposition and excommunication.
Sometimes the religious awe with which the authority
of pope and council is regarded by sincere Roman-
catholics might be trusted to work against t!

oppression and outrage with which the dissentients

had taken their leave* of Rome before the Council
closed. Sometimes, doubtless, the consciousness that
all hope of professional promotion was dependent on
the good-will of that court of Rome which now de-
manded the great act of submission mighl be counted
on to torn the balance of some hesitating mind. But
another process for enforcing absolute subservience to
the central will had Long ago been prepared against
just such emergencies, by which the court, without
seeming to do anything at all, might in fact do i
thing short of actual bodily compulsion.

Among the enormous encroachments of the Roman
see which in latter ages have swallowed up the last
vestiges of the freedom of the bishops is that which is
suggested by the phrase " quinquennial faculties." At
the accession of each bishop to his office, papers are
issued to him licensing him for five years from that
date, and no longer, (unless the license be renewed for
a like period,) to perform certain acts, without which it
would be, in effect, impossible for him to continue the
administration of his diocese. It is publicly and re-
sponsibly charged, in Rome itself, before the very face
of the pope's court, that the adhesion of the bishops of
the minority was extorted from them under the pressure
of the refusal otherwise to renew their "faculties."*

* Letter to Mgr. Nardi, published in La Libertd, Rome, April
14, 1871. "You think that the question of infallibility is closed

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 219

By one influence or another it was brought about
that many, in fact, nearly all, of the bishops who had
protested most stoutly against the dogma as incredible

by the adhesion of many of the opposition bishops. You are mis-
taken. The Council not having been concluded with the definiens
subscripsi of all the bishops, the opposition may at any time be
renewed. And well it may be, considering that the adhesions have
been obtained in a manner of which you are not ignorant, that is,
by means of moral violence. I will mention one case, by way of
example. As the last Lent approached, the opposition bishops
applied, like the others, for the renewal of their 'faculties' — for
the popes now hold all episcopal powers concentred in their own
hands. Well, what was the answer? That if they wished the
faculties, they should humble themselves at the feet of the holy
father, that is, give in their adhesion to his infallibility and exclu-
sive jurisdiction. Thus many adhered, in order to escape the
vexation of the Curia, and to make it possible to carry on the
spiritual government of their dioceses." The letter, though anony-
mous, is known to have been written by an eminent priest of one
of the religious orders in Rome. In his speech before the Old
Catholic Congress at Munich, September, 1871, Father Hyacinthe
describes with great power and pathos the various forms of "mor-
al violence " brought to bear on the will and even on the conscience,
of those who in their hearts disbelieved the infallibility^ dogma, to
induce an outward act of submission.

Among the "faculties" or licenses issued regularly by the
pope to bishops, on their application, empowering them to exer-
cise functions pertaining to their office, the most important are
those which are always conferred for the term of five years, and are
therefore called "the quinquennial faculties." When the person
intrusted with them dies or is promoted during the term, the fac-
ulties do not descend to his successor, but must be applied for
anew. They are enumerated in twenty particulars ; but the most
important may be summed up under these six heads :

(1.) The power of absolving in cases usually reserved to the
pope ; also from heresy, apostasy, schism, and even (in Protestant
countries) from relapse.

(2.) Permission to have and read (in order to confute them)
heretical and other writings designated in the Index of Prohibited
Books ; and to allow the reading of them, with the same purpose,
(under a prohibition to circulate them,) to other learned and dis-
creet men.

220 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and against the Council as being without liberty and
therefore without authority, were induced, like the
archbishop of St. Louis, to retract their words ; or
else, like the bishop of Cleveland, quietly to retire from
the administration of their dioceses. The first voice
to break the silence was the same v >f one cry-

ing in the wilderness, which had wakened the atten-
tion of the whole world by a Protesi uttered from the
silence of his Carmelite cell, one short year before.
The following is

FATHER HYACINTHE'S APPEAL TO THE
CATHOLIC BISHOPS.

Bona, absent in body, present in spirit)
ristmaa, U

WheH war broke out, like that thunderbolt which
burst over the Vatican at the promulgation of the im-
pious dogma, I hastened to write a brief protest. This
duty fulfilled, I kept silence. I watched the sweeping
off, as of the chaff which the wind driveth away, of
those two absolutisms which, sometimes in mutual

(3.) Permission to grant dispensations in case of certain im-
pediments to marriage.

(4.) Power' to absolve in case of secret crime, with the excep-
tion of murder ; and to commute, or release from vows, duties of
fasting, etc.

(5.) Release from the obligation of certain of the more cum-
brous formalities in conducting divine sen ice.

(6.) The power of transferring these faculties to priests within
the diocese.

It is obvious that even those bishops who are not "remova-
ble at the nod " of the pope, must nevertheless become quite help-
less in their subserviency to him, as soon as their ' ' five-years' fac-
ulties " expire.

For a fuller account of the matter, see that standard Roman-
catholic work, Wetzer und Welte's Kirchen-Lexikon, s. v. Fucul-
men.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 221

league, sometimes in hostility, had so grievously op-
pressed both the church and the world — the empire of
the Napoleons and the temporal power of the popes.
The abettors of the infallibility movement have not
understood this religious silence to . which so many
souls have restrained themselves, and which they above
all others ought to have maintained ; pursuing that
audacious policy which with one stroke has accom-
plished both their triumph and their ruin, they busy
themselves with noisy calculations upon the more or
less prudent reserve of some, the more or less con-
strained adherence of others. Such a misunderstand-
ing cannot longer be kept up ; it would be wrong not
to oppose what would otherwise result in establishing
falsehood by prescriptive right.

The political catastrophe which, especially for
Frenchmen, might seem at first a reason for silence,
becomes, if truly apprehended, an urgent motive for
speaking and acting. I do not hesitate to say it, the
question which at this very moment takes precedence
of all others in France is the religious question. France
cannot do without Christianity ; and yet she cannot
accept Christianity under the forms of oppression and
corruption with which it has been disguised. There-
fore it is that she, even more than the Latin races in
general, has been forced to live without religion, and
consequently without moral power, between ultramon-
tanism and infidelity, two foes of which she has taken
but too slight account, and against whom she had need
to fight not less, certainly, than against those who have
invaded nothing but her soil.

Suffer me, then, in the presence of the woes of my
country and the woes of the church, to address the
Catholic bishops of the whole world, and especially

222 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

those of them who look ujjon the situation as I do
myself, and who, to my own knowledge, arc not few.
Who am I that I should speak to them so boldly?
But the illustrious Gersoii lias not hesitated to declare
that in times of crisis the humblest woman has the
right to convoke the (Ecumenical Council and save the
church universal. 1 assume this right ; I perform this
duty ; I conjure the bishops to put an end to that la-
tent schism which is separating as by chasms, the depth
of which is the more fearful as it is more unperceived.
Above all, we need to be told by them whether the
decrees of the late Council are binding on our faith or
no. In an assembly the primary conditions of which

are absolute liberty of discussion and moral unanimity

of suffrage, bishops, respectable by reason of their
number ami by their eminence in learning and in
character, openly and repeatedly complained of ;tll
manner of restrictions put upon their liberty, and
finally refused to take part in the vote. Is it possible
that, returning to their dioceses, and waking as it were
from a long dream, they have acquired the retrospec-
tive certainty of having really enjoyed, while at Rome,
that moral independence of which they were not con-
scious at the time? The supposition is an insult. We
are not dealing here with one of those mysteries that
are above man's reason, but simply with a fact of con-
sciousness. To change one's mind in a matter of this
sort would not be to submit one's reason to authority ;
it would be to sacrifice one's conscience.

Now, if this be so, we are still tree, after, as before
the Council, to reject the infalhbility of the pope, as a
doctrine unknown to ecclesiastical antiquity and hav-
ing its foundations only in apocryphal documents upon
which criticism has pronounced beyond all appeal.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 223

We are^till free to say, openly, loyally, that we do
not accept the late Encyclicals and the Syllabus, which
their most intelligent defenders are constrained to in-
terpret in opposition to their natural meaning, and to
the known intent of their author, and the result of
which, if they were to be taken in earnest, would be to
establish a radical incompatibility between the duties
of a faithful Catholic and those of an impartial scholar
and a free citizen.

Such are the most salient points at which the schism
has been effected. It is the right of every Catholic
who cares for the integrity and the dignity of his faith,
of every priest who has at heart the loyalty of his min-
istry, to interrogate the bishops on these points ; and
it is their duty to answer without reservation and with-
out subterfuge. Reservation and subterfuge — these
have been our ruin. *It is high time to restore in our
church the ancient sincerity in religion which has so
decayed among us.

But, mark it well, the facts and doctrines which I
have pointed out are connected with a great system,
and, to reach the details, the remedy must penetrate
the whole. The question is aggravated by the very
excesses of the ultramontanes, and from this time forth
the issue is to be this : whether or not the nineteenth
century is to have its Catholic Reformation, as the six-
teenth had its Protestant Reformation.

Look, O bishops', upon the bride of Jesus Christ,
whom you also have espoused, the holy Church, pierced,
like Him, with five wounds !

The first, the wound in the right hand — the hand
which holds the light, is the hiding of the word of God.
That sacred volume, opened over the world to enlight-
en and to fructify, why has it been shut up again in the

224 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

darkness of dead languages, and under then* ;il of the
severest prohibitions? The bread of instruction and
life which God had prepared as well for the poor as for
the wise and learned, how has it been taken from them?
It is vain to allege, l'<»r a pretext, the abuses of 1
and unbelief. Put the Bible in its true relation with
science, by an intelligent exegesis, and they will have
nothing to fear from each other. Put it in its true re-
lation with the people, by a religions education worthy
of itself and of them, and the Bible will become the
safest guide of the people's life — the healthiest inspi-
ration of their worship.

The wound in the other hand is the oppression of
intellect and conscience by the abuse of hierarchical
power. Of a truth, Jesus Christ said to his apostles :
"Go, teach all nations;" but he said also to them :
"The princes of the nations exercise dominion over
them, but it shall not be so among you !" Successors
of the apostles, make haste to unbind from our shoul-
ders that burden which neither we nor our fathers liave
been able to bear, and restore that light and easy yoke
to which we are invited by the love of the Redeemer !

And what shall I say of the spear-wound in the
heart P I must call it by its name, for they who most
suffer from it are those who most shrink from speaking
of it — it is the celibacy of the priests. I speak not of
voluntary celibacy, the more pleasing to God as it is
free and joyous, like the love that inspires it — the por-
tion of a few souls, called to it and sustained in it by
an exceptional grace. But when it is extended indis-
criminately over natures the most unlike and the most
unfit — when it is imposed as an irrevocable oath upon
their inexperience and enthusiasm, celibacy becomes an
institution without mercy, and too often without mo-

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 225

rality. The nations who look upon it as the exclusive
ideal of perfection, throw contempt on the sanctity of
wedded life ; and, debasing the family in comparison
with the cloister, they reduce the family to a mere ref-
uge for vulgar, or, at best, for earthly souls. The do-
mestic hearth ceases to be an altar !

But the last wounds of the church, that cripple
her feet when she would rest upon the earth, are these:
worldly policy and superstitious piety. A policy the
church must have, for she stands in necessary relations
with the powers of this world ; but that policy is most
completely expressed in the words of the Master : "I,
if I be lifted up above the earth, will draw all men
unto me." Is this that policy of the temporal power
and the secular arm which makes the possession of cer-
tain provinces in Italy and certain privileges in Europe
the essential condition o£ the empire of souls, the pivot
of the whole spiritual structure ? A policy as fatal to
the church and the world as that Revolution which it
subserves even while it is contesting it ! A policy the
impotent, blind persistency in which it is now desired
to exalt to the dignity of a dogma ! And yet there is
no lack of spiritual force in modern Catholicism. It
counts its devout souls by thousands ; it sees the no-
blest works and virtues nourishing within its pale. Why
is this piety, so touching and so genuine, too often
handed over to the seductions of a mysticism without
depth, and an asceticism without austerity- — so differ-
ent from those that shed grandeur on the early Chris-
tian centuries ? External practices of devotion — mate-
rial practices, I had almost said — are multiplied with-
out limit ; the adoration of the saints, especially of the
holy Virgin, are developed in proportions and under a
character which are alien to genuine Catholic feeling ;
10*

220 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

mid that worship of the Father in spirit and in truth,
which Jesus made the soul of his religion, is sensibly
diminishing among us.

Such is the body of Christ, in the state bo which
our sins have brought it on the earth — sins of the
priests, as much and more than those of the people.
O bishops, will you have no pity on us V Will you not
apply some efficacious remedy? " Is there no balm in
( lilcad ? Is there no physician there ?"

I pause. My heart is so burdened that I cannot go
on. I know not what shall become of my poor word
amid the shock of empires and the voice of blood going
up from the field of carnage. But I know this : that,
if it be not strong enough to speed the accomplish-
ment of God's designs, it is faithful to declare them.

And this, too, I know : that I do not separate my-
self from the holy Catholic faith, nor from the church
of my baptism and priesthood If her venerated chiefs
shall heed my humble appeal, I shall resume at once,
in obedience and in honor and loyalty, a ministry which
has been the one passion of my youth, the one ambi-
tion of my life, and which nothing but my conscience
could haae forced me painfully to relinquish. If, on
the contrary, they answer me only by their reprobation
or their silence, I shall not suffer this to disturb me in
my love for a church that is greater than those who
govern it, stronger than those who defend it. Holding
fast by the heritage left me by my fathers, and not to
be rent from me by unjust and therefore invalid ex-
communications, I shall devote to the preparation of
the kingdom of God upon earth that free personal
labor which is the common duty of all true Christians.

HYACINTHE.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 227

From France, tossing in the agony of her terrible
calamity, this touching appeal called forth no answer-
ing voice. It may have seemed to the party of abso-
lutism a mere cry of fruitless despair, the wail of a
dying cause. For their heart seemed more fully set
in them than ever to carry through their victory with
a high hand. They proceeded to take rigorous meas-
ures against the most illustrious of those scholars who,
speaking in the name of theological science, had pro-
nounced the doctrine of infallibility to be in contradic-
tion to the facts of history, and the citations made in
defence of it to be forgeries, interpolations, mutila-
tions, and perversions. The venerable Dollinger was
summoned by his archbishop to repudiate that which
he solemnly believed to be the truth, and to enunciate
that which he knew to be falsehood, under penalty of
deposition and excommunication. The summons was
answered on the 28th of March, 1871, by a memorial
respectful in tone, but in its spirit a challenge to the
hierarchs of the church to meet its scholars and doc-
tors and disprove the indictment of fraud, falsehood,
and oppression which he there put on record against
them. •

He declared himself ready to prove —

First, that the texts of holy Scripture cited in de-
fence of the decrees of the Council could not be so cited
except in violation of the solemn oath, sworn by every
priest, not to receive^ nor interpret the holy Scripture
except in accordance with the unanimous consent of
the fathers.*

Secondly, that the assertion that the substance of
the new decrees has been believed and taught in the
church always and everywhere, or almost everywhere,
* See above, p. 10G.

228 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

rests on an entire misapprehension of tradition, and
a perversion of history, and is in direct opposition to
the clearest facts and testimoni

Thirdly, that the bishops of the Latin countries,
who constituted the immense majority of the Council,
had been misled on the subject of the papal authority
by the text-books used in their theological ^training ;
the passages quoted in these books as proofs being
false, forged, or garbled.

Fourthly, that the new decrees are in direct contra-
diction to decrees of former (Ecumenical Councils con-
firmed by popes.

Fifthly, that the new decrees are incompatible with
the constitutions of the states of Europe, and espe-
cially with that of Bavaria.

This brave letter concluded with the following wi >r<ls :

"Asa Christian, ax a theologian, as an historian, /n><l
ax a citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine.

"Not as a Christian; for it is irreconcilable with
the spirit of the gospel, and with the clear declarations
of Christ and the apostles. It seeks precisely to erect
a ' kingdom of this world ' such as Christ repudiated —
a ' lordship over the church ' such as Peter forbade to
himself and to all.

"Not as a theologian ; for it stands in irreconcila-
ble contradiction to all the authentic tradition of the
church.

" Not as an historian ; for as such I know that the
constant effort to realize this theory of universal em-
pire has cost Europe rivers of blood, has devastated
and degraded whole countries, has ruined the noble
fabric of the constitution of the ancient church, and
has engendered, aggrandized, and perpetuated in the
church the most deplorable abuses.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 229

"Finally, as a citizen, I must reject this doctrine;
because, by its pretension to bring states and mon-
archs and the whole political order into subjection to
the papal power, and by the exemptions from law which
it claims for the clergy, it prepares the way for dis-
cords infinitely mischievous between state and church,
between clergy and laity. For I cannot hide from my-
self that this doctrine, in consequence of which the
ancient German empire was brought to ruin, if it
should once become dominant in the Catholic part of
the German nation, would implant also in the newly
constituted empire the germs of an incurable dis-
order."*

* I. von Db'llinger's Erklarung an den Erzbischof von Miinchen-
Freising. Miinchen, 1871. Dr. Dollinger appends to this conclu-
sion of his Declaration the following from the pope's official organ*
the Civilta Cattolica, of March 18, 1871 : * ' The pope is the su-
preme judge of the law of the land. In him, the two powers, the
spiritual and the secular, meet as in their apex ; for he is the vice-
gerent of Christ, who is not only a Priest for ever, but also King
of kings and Lord of lords. . . . The pope, by virtue of his high
dignity, is at the summit of both powers." This interpretation of
the Vatican decrees will of course be repudiated by the Koinish
clergy in America. But is it not authoritative ? Archbishop Man-
ning, who claims to know the mind of the pope, although he may
perhaps not equally apprehend the expediency of disguising it,
presents a like statement. See above, in Abp. Kenrick's Speech,
p. 129 and note. We have since found Archbishop Manning's
utterance at Kensington, there quoted, given more at length, and
the statement is so condensed, explicit, and authoritative, that it
is worth repeating. He is speaking as in the name and person of
the pontiff:

"You say I have no authority over the Christian world, that I
am not the vicar of the Good Shepherd, that I am not the supreme
interpreter of the Christian faith. I am all these. You ask me to
abdicate — to renounce my supreme authority. You tell me that
I ought to submit to the civil power, that I am the subject of the
king of Italy, and from him I am to receive instructions as to the
way I should exercise the civil power. I say I am liberated from

230 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The exposure of the enormous Insolence and the
greedy grasp of these papal pretensions began to tell,
not-only upon the minds of scholars and of intelligent
private Roman-catKolics, but upon practical states-
men. It had been in vain that before and during the
sitting of the Council, efforts had bees made fco com-
bine the administrators of European goTernments in an
effort to discourage the enactment of a dogma fraught
with such political mischiefs. They were averse to any

all civil subjection, Hint my Lord made me the subject of no one
ill. king or otherwise ; thftt in His right I am sovereign. I
acknowledge no civil superior, I am the subject of no prine
I claim more than this — I claim to be the Supreme Judge and
director of the consciences of men ; of the peasant that tills the
field and the prinoe that sits ou the throne ; of the household that
D tin- shade of privacy and the legislature that makes laws
for kingdoms— I am the sole last Supreme Judge of what is right
and wrong."

The practical political bearing of this theory, now become the
law of the church, may be illustrated by two tacts occurring in a
single American diocese.

In February, 1856, the Rt. Rev. Bishop of Toronto declared in
a pastoral letter : ' ' Catholic electors in this country who do not
use their electoral power in behalf of separate schools are guilty of
mortal sin. Likewise parents not making the sacrifices necessary
to secure such schools, or sending their children to mixed schools.

' • Moreover, the confessor who should give absolution to such
parents, elector*, or legislators as support mixed schools to the preju-
dice of separate schools would be guilty of a mortal sin."

Accordingly, on the 6th of July, 1856, this bishop excommuni-
cated Messrs. Couchon, Cartier, Lemieux, and Drummond, mem-
bers of the Canadian Parliament, for not voting straight in respect
to education and legacies to priests. [Romanism as it Is, pp. 520,
521, 586.]

The influence of the hierarchy and the confessional on nomi-
nations, elections, and legislation is generally a secret, even from
many of the faithful, who stoutly and honestly declare that it
does not exist. Ordinarily it is revealed to outsiders only by its
effects, which are sometimes startling enough, as the history of
New York eitv shows.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 231

interference with the mere enunciation of abstract
propositions at a distance. But it could no longer be
disguised that the question whether Caesar was to have
the things that are Caesar's, was coming to a practical
issue. The hierarchy of Germany, Jed by the arch-
bishop of Munich, hastened to oppose the letter of Dr.
Dollinger with two pastorals under their joint signa-
tures, addressed, one to the clergy and the other to the
laity, asserting the binding authority of the Vatican
decrees, denouncing theological science in Germany
as unfaithful to the church, and nervously denying that
the Koman dogmas could be dangerous to civil govern-
ments— the charge was "a calumny." But one thing
was evident, alike from the attack and from the defence
and disclaimer, to wit, that once more the hierarchy
had waked up against itself an old antagonist within
the church, which more than once before had encoun-
tered its fiercest terrors without flinching, and put a
barrier to its exorbitant pretensions. This antagonist
was The Catholic Universities,

The summary proceedings against the venerable
Dollinger had the effect to -draw forth some indications
of sympathy and cooperation from the insulted govern-
ments, and to rally about him thoughtful, seholarlike,
and courageous men, willing to share the persecution
which might be inflicted on him for the declaration of
facts which were as well known to themselves as to
him. The answer to the bishops' pastorals, published
in June, 1871, stood in the name, not of Dr. Dollinger
alone, but of more than thirty persons, eminent in
church or state, or in literature and science. It was as
follows :

232 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

DECLARATION OF PROF. DOLLINGER
AND HIS ASSOCIATES.

In view of the administrative measures and the
manifestoes of the German bishops in support of the
decrees of the Vatican, the undersigned deem it neces-
sary to set forth in the following declaration the prin-
ciples on which they act, and so far as in them lies, to
offer some relief for the burden which is lying on men's
consciences.

I. Faithful to the inviolable duty, incumbent on
every Catholic Christian, of holding fast the ancient
faith, and repelling every novelty, were it announced
even by an angel from heaven — a duty not denied by
the pope or the bishops — we persist in rejecting the
dogmas of the Vatican. Never heretofore has it been
a part of the doctrine of the church or of the Catholic
faith, that every Christian should recognize in the pope
an absolute master and sovereign to whom he is directly
and immediately subject, and to whose envoys and leg-
ates he owes unconditional obedience in everything
touching religious faith and practical morality. It is
likewise notorious that down to the present day, it has
never been the teaching of the churcji that the gift of
infalhbility has been granted to a man — that is, the
X^ope for the time being — in the definitions which he
addresses to the whole church on points of faith and
on human rights and duties. On the contrary, these
propositions, although in great favor at Rome and en-
couraged by all the means at the disposal of a domi-
nant power, have hitherto been nothing but scholastic
opinions, which the most renowned theologians have
been at liberty to attack and repudiate without exposing
themselves to the slightest censure. It is notorious

THE SEQUEL OF TPIE COUNCIL. 233

(and if the German bishops do not know this, they
ought to know it) that these doctrines owe their origin
to falsehood, and their diffusion to violence. These
doctrines, in the form in which they have been pro-
claimed by the pope in the Vatican decrees, strip the
community of believers .of its essential rights, deprive
its testimony of all value, destroy the authority of
ecclesiastical tradition and the fundamental principles
of the Catholic faith, according to which Christians are
bound to believe nothing but what has been taught and
believed always, everywhere, and by all : Quod ubique,
quod semper, quod ah omnibus. Notwithstanding the
late pastoral of the German bishops affirms that Peter
has spoken by the mouth of the pope, proclaiming him-
self infallible, we are bound to repel such a pretension
as a blasphemy. Peter speaks to us, clearly and intel-
ligibly to every one, in his acts and his speeches re-
lated by the holy Scriptures, and in his epistles, which
are addressed to us as well as to the first believers.
These acts, speeches and epistles are animated by a
totally different spirit, and contain a very different
doctrine from that which it is now sought to impose
upon us. The attempt has been made, it is true, to
mitigate these new doctrines, which in their crudity
and their incalculable sweep wound all the Christian
feelings ; and it has been sought to persuade the peo-
ple that they have always been believed, and that they
cover no ensnaring consequences. ' Just as before, in
other circumstances, so in the late pastoral, great pains
have been taken to present the infallibility spoken of
in the new decrees as a' prerogative pertaining to the
whole magisterium of the church, composed of pope and
bishops. But this interpretation is in contradiction to
the clear and literal sense of these decrees, according

23i THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to which the pope exclusively, and by himself alone, is
infallible ; he it is to whom the assistance of the Holy
Ghost is given, and who in his decisions remains com-
pletely independent of the judgment of the bisho]

that their assent to every papal decision wh;

henceforth obligatory, and cannot be refused How-
ever the German bishops may argue that the plenitude
of power with which he is invested by the Vatican de-
crees cannot be considered as a power unlimited and
extending to everything, because the exercise of it is
restrained by revealed doctrine and the divine consti-
tution of the church, they might as well argue that
unlimited and despotic power does n<>t exist anywhere

in the world, even anion-" the Mohammedans, because
the sultan and the shah of Persia themselves acknowl-
edge that their power is limited by the law of (iod ami
the dogmas of the Koran. By the new decrees tin-
pope is not only invested with dominion over the whole
field of morality, but he determines — still by himself
alone, and with the authority of an infallible master —
what does and what does not belong to this domain,
what principles are ot divine obligation, and also what
interpretation and application it is best to give to them
in particular cases. In the exercise of this authority,
the pope is not bound to receive any approval outside
of himself ; he is accountable to no one on earth, and
no one may oppose him. Every one, prince or peasant,
bishop or layman, is obliged to submit without condi-
tion, and obey without contradiction his every com-
mand. If such a power cannot be called unlimited
and despotic, there never has been unlimited and des-
potic power in the world, and there never will be.

II. "We persist in our profound conviction that the
Vatican decrees constitute a serious peril to the state

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 235

and to society ; that they are incompatible with the
laws and institutions of modern states, and that in
accepting them we should be entering into an irrecon-
cilable conflict with our political duties and oaths. In
vain do the bishops labor, whether by affecting to be
ignorant of them, or by attempting to interpret them
in their own fashion, to destroy the incontestable fact
of the existence of bulls and pontifical decisions which
subject all powers to the will of the apostolic see, and
which condemn in the most absolute way the laws most
indispensable to the existence of modern society. The
bishops are perfectly well aware that, by virtue of the
Vatican decrees, they have no right to restrict pontifi-
cal decisions, whether old or recent, by artificial inter-
pretations, and that the contradictory explanation of
one solitary Jesuit will outweigh that of a hundred
bishops. In this very matter, the interpretations of the
German bishops are in opposition to those of other
prelates, particularly those of the archbishop of West-
minster, Manning, who gives to the papal infallibility
the widest imaginable extent.* And consequently, not-
withstanding the reproaches addressed to us by the
bishops, Ave consider ourselves fully warranted in say-
ing that an infallibility such as it is wished to ascribe
to the pope, and to him alone, without the intervention
of any other party, should be styled a personal infalli-
bility. This expression is perfectly exact, and in ac-
cordance with the usage of speech, in which we com-
monly call that power personal which is possessed and
exercised by a monarch independently of the other
authorities of the state. Thus, too, an official preroga-
tive is called personal when it is so strictly and insep-
arably attached to a person that he can neither divest
* See above, p. 229.

23G THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

himself of it nor delegate it to others. When we com-
pare (which the German bishops have neglected to do)
the condemnations pronounced in the Syllabus, (which
has now become a decree invested with the papal infal-
libility,) the solemn condemnation by the pope of the

Austrian constitution, the simultaneous publicatio

the Jesuits of Laach, Vienna, and Koine, who are niueli

better informed than the German bishops on the inten-
tions of the Roman Curia — when we compare all these
with the Vatican decrees, we must be blind not to see
an ably-concerted plan tor the universal monarchy of
the popes. Our governments, our laws, and our politi-
cal constitutions, everything pertaining to morality, the
actions of each individual— everything, must hence-
forth be submitted to the Roman Curia, its organs, and
its legates, whether fixed or itinerant, whether bishops
Or Jesuits. Sole legislator in matters of faith, disci-
pline, and morals, supreme judge, sovereign, and irre-
sponsible executioner of his own sentences, the pope,
by virtue of the new doctrine, possesses such a pleni-
tude of power, that the most ardent imagination can
conceive of none greater. The Cerman bishops might
well lay to heart the golden words pronounced at
Munich by the Franciscan Occam in a situation analo-
gous to our own : "If the bishop of Rome possessed a
plenitude of power such as the popes falsely lay claim
to, and such as many, through mistake, or in the spirit
of adulation concede to them, all men would be slaves ;
and this is plainly contrary to the liberty of the gospel
law."

III. We appeal to the testimony involuntarily borne
by the German bishops themselves to the justice of our
cause. If we openly and directly reject the new doc-
trine which makes the pope universal bishop and abso-

TOE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 237

lute master of every Christian in the whole domain of
morals — that is to say, of everything that one may or
may not do — the bishops, for their part, prove, by the
different and contradictory interpretations given in
their pastoral letters, that they apprehend clearly
enough the novel character of this doctrine, and the
repugnance it excites, and they make it plain that, at
the last analysis, they are ashamed of it themselves.
Not a man of them has had the <?ourage to follow the
example of Manning and the Jesuits, and give the Vat-
ican decrees their simple and natural sense.* But they
forget that if they were to apply to the other decrees
on matters of faith efforts like those they employ in
their pastorals in order to extenuate the meaning of
those now in question, they would soon shake the solid-
ity and unity of doctrine, and produce a general sense
of insecurity and uncertainty throughout the whole do-
main of faith. In fact, what would be left of certainty
and assurance in the decisions of the church, old or
new, if they were all to be treated in the method em-
ployed by the late pastorals for the interpretation of
the bull of Boniface VIII. , f and if people were to fall
into as flat a contradiction as they have in the present
case, with the literal sense of the decisions and their
manifest intention? We deplore such a use of the
teaching power of the bishops. Still more profoundly
do we deplore that these bishops have not been ashamed,
in a pastoral addressed to the Catholic laity, to respond
to the outcry of the consciences of their people by in-
sults to reason and learning. Truly, when we look

[* So far as we are aware, this disposition to mince the matter
is as prevalent among the American bishops as among the Ger-
man. ]

[f The bull Unam Sandam. See Abp. Kenrick, p. 125, above. ]

238 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

back from these men who seem to know no higher duty
than that of blind obedience, towards their venerable
predecessors in the episcopate— like Cyprian, Athana-
sius, and Augustine — we feel thai we have better excuse
than ever St. Bernard had for letting slip that sorrow^
fal exclamation : Quia nobis dabti videre Ecdesiam sicut
erat in diebus antiqx

IV. We repel the threats of the bishops as being
out of accordance with law, and their despotic measures
as not being valid nor binding. In other times, through-
out the whole church, the maxim amis held in
respect, that whenever it was possible to show the time
of the first appearance oi any doctrine, it was a sure
proof that the doctrine was fa - pre-

cisely the fact in the case of the new doctrine of papal
infallibility. We can fix exactly tin- tfi appear-

ance, the persons who conceived it, and the int •
which it was made to subserve. In former times, when
popes and bishops cut off from the communion of the
church the authors and abettors of an anti-Catholic
doctrine, they vindicated themselves mainly by the nov-
elty of the doctrine, and its opposition to the old tra-
ditionary faith ; and by this fact, so obvious and
to be proved, that their opinion had not been thereto-
fore received as part of the divine revelation, the ex-
communicates might be convinced of the justice of the
sentence pronounced against them by the church. Now,
on the contrary, for the first time (no other example of
it can be found in the course of eighteen centuries)
excommunication is fulminated against men, not for
maintaining and propagating a new doctrine, but be-
cause they would preserve the ancient faith as they

[* "Who will show us the church as it used to be in old
times ?*']

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 239

have received it from their parents and their teachers
in the school and in the church, and are not willing to
accept a different doctrine, nor change their faith as
they do their garments. It is the general teaching of
the fathers of the church, that an unjust excommuni-
cation does not harm him who suffers it, but only him
who pronounces it ; and that, on the contrary, God
turns into a source of grace the sufferings of those who
are persecuted for righteousness' sake. We know that
such condemnations are as invalid and destitute of
binding force as they are unjust, and that consequently
they cannot deprive believers of their right to the
means of grace instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ,
nor take from priests the faculty of dispensing them.
We are resolved, therefore, that we will not suffer our-
selves to be robbed of our rights by censures inflicted
in the interest of false doctrines.

V. We live in the hope that the conflict which has
broken out shall be, under the direction of Providence,
a means of realizing the reformation so long desired,
and now become inevitable, in ecclesiastical affairs,
both in the constitution and in the life of the church.
As we look towards the future we are cheered and
comforted amid the bitter trials of the present confu-
sion. If at present we meet, in all parts of the church,
abuses without measure, which, fortified and put be-
yond the reach of cure by the triumph of the Vatican
dogmas, might grow in time to such dimensions as to
choke all Christian life — if we perceive with grief the
tendency towards a centralization which paralyzes the
mind, and towards a mechanical uniformity — if we
consider the ever-growing incapacity of the hierarchy,
which knows nothing else to do but to oppose the im-
mense intellectual movement of the present age with

240 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

conventional phrases and impotent imprecations — on
the other hand our courage revives at the remembrance
of better times, and we put our trust in the divine
Ruler of the church. Looking to the past as well as
to the future, we see before us the vision of the regen-
erated church restored to its true ideal to that condi-
tion in which every civilized people of the Catholic
communion, without prejudice to its union with the
universal ehurch, but liberated front the yoke of arbi-
trary domination, shall order and pel-feet its own eccle-
siastical constitution in accordance with its own charac-
ter, and in harmony with its peculiar mission of civili-
zation, through the agreement and mutual cooperation
of clergy and laity ; and in which all Catholic Christen-
dom shall be placed under the direction of a primacy
and an episcopacy which, through their learning and

the active part which they shall take in the public life
of the people, shall gain the knowledge and capacity
needful to reconquer for the church and permanently
to secure for her the only place worthy of her — the
place she ought to hold at the head of universal civili-
zation. By this course, and not by the decrees of the
Vatican, shall we make progress towards the supreme
end assigned to Christian development, that is, the re-
union of the other Christian communions now separa-
ted from us — a union desired and promised by the
Founder of the church, and longed-for and demanded
with an ever-increasing ardor by numberless Christian
believers, both in Germany and elsewhere. May God
grant it to us !*

* Not having the original of this document at hand, we have
translated from the authorized French version published in con-
nection with the manifesto of Father Hyacinthe, " Ma foi el ma
conscience," bv Dentu, Paris.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 241

The combat entered upon in such sober earnest
could not but grow more and more active, and by its
relation to material and secular interests compel the
attention of the civil government, and of that part of
the public to whom its merely religious aspect had no
interest. One of the earliest documents of the contro-
versy was the work of Professor Yon Schulte of Prague,
one of the first scholars in Europe in Canon Law — a
work which deals specially with the relations of the
irreparably divided Catholic church of Germany to the
state and to the church property, claiming that the
Old Catholics, as the anti-infallibilist party began to be
called, were the true representatives of that institu-
tion which the state had recognized as its established
church, and the successors to its "good will" and
effects.*

In presence of a revolt so resolute and serious,
Rome could not but anathematize and excommunicate.
Her imprecations fell like hail upon the ranks of the
Old Catholic party. Priests were suspended or de-
posed, schoolmasters were removed from office, profes-

* A brief notice is given in The Nation of November 2, 1871, of
an article in the Ilistorische Zeitschrift, probably from the distin-
guished pen of the editor, Von Sybel, which " discusses the Vati-
can Council from the point of view in general of Dollinger and the
anti-infallibilists. After a sketch of the history of the Council
and of the dogma of infallibility — in which the striking point is
made that this was the first Council in which only ecclesiastics
sat, and, since the theologians were excluded, only the higher cler-
gy--the writer proceeds to speak of the future. He shows that the
treaty which has heretofore existed between church and state
assumes the Confession of Trent as its basis. If the church dis-
cards this traditional character, and its relation to the state and to
other confessions is essentially altered, the contract is virtually
broken, and the other party is freed from all its obligations. It is
for Germany to say, then, whether the primacy of Rome is any
long'er to be acknowledged."

Vatican Council. \\

242 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

sors were stigmatized as heretical, ami students warned
against their teachings. Every combination of influ-
ences was brought to bear to make sympathy with the
obnoxious party costly ami dangerous >r the

priest, it is poverty, dishonor under the ban of interdict

and the thunderbolt of anathema, the loss of this min-
istry of the altar and of souls to which in youth he so
joyously offered himself a sacriiice. For the layman it
is injury in the good name and estate which are not
merely his, but which he holds jointly with his wife
and as a trust for his children. If he is an officeholder,
he compromises his promotion under an ultramontane
administration. If he ifl a representative, he hazards
his election ; a physician or lawyer, his practi<
merchant, his business connection: a citizen in any
relation, his consideration with a great number of his
fellow-citizens. Must I mention, in conclusion, one
thing more painful still? — he hazards the peace of his
Jireside and the sanctity of his shroud and bier!"*

In the great Eoman-catholic state of Bavaria, and
elsewhere in Germany, the governments refused to sus-
tain the sentences of the hierarchy. Deposed ecclesi-
astics, like Friedrich and Dollinger, continued to be
recognized as holding their former offices, or, as a more
emphatic rebuke to the bishops, were advanced in dig-
nity. And while schoolmasters, thrust from their em-
ployment for refusing submission to the new dogma,
were restored and protected by the state, those bishops
who had hastened to promulgate the Vatican decrees
without the consent of the government, were sharply
admonished that they had rendered themselves liable
to pains and penalties for violation of public law. Thus

* Speech of Father Hyacinthe at the Old Catholic Conference,
Munich, September 23, 1871.

THE SEQUEL OF THE COUNCIL. 243

Peter once more found that lie who takes the secular
sword may perish by the sword.

But a far more important matter than the attitude
of the governments was the attitude of the peoples.
And this was not slow in being manifested. Addresses
of sympathy flowed in from every quarter to the men
who were recognized as the leaders of the movement.
To one of these were attached no less than twelve
thousand signatures. And it was a notable thing to
what a great extent these signatures represented, not
in all cases the nobility or the wealth of the continent,
but its thoughtfulness and learning. The new growth
had struck deep root in the universities. As if to em-
phasize the distinctive character of the struggle as an
antagonism between ignorant devotion and enlightened
faith, the bishops attempted to offset the moral effect
of the multitudes of the Old Catholic addresses and
popular assemblies, by gathering mass-meetings, which
were made up in large proportion of that ignorant
peasantry on whom the grasp of a priesthood is always
found to be strongest.

The growing movement necessitated a general con-
ference for consultation ; and the assembling of such
a body at Munich in September, 1871, marks the close
of the brief but momentous first chapter of the yet
unwritten and unenacted history of the Old Catholic
church after its disruption from the Vatican or Neo-
Catholic church.

Of this meeting, it is sufficient that we record the
document which, after long and serious debate, was
finally adopted as a

244 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

PROGBAMME OF THE ANTI-INFALLIBIL-
ITY LEAGUE.

1. A proper sense of our religious duties compels
OS to cling to the Old Catholic tftith as laid down in
Holy Writ and tradition, and to the Old Catholic forms
of divine service. We therefore regard ourselves as
legitimate members of the Catholic church, and will
not be expelled from that church, nor do we renounce
any of the civil or ecclesiastical rights belonging to it.

As to the ecclesiastical penalties to which we have

been subjected for adhering to the old faith, we declare
them arbitrary and absurd; and shall not thereby be
prevented from acknowledging ourselves and acting as
true and Conscientious sons of the church. Taking our
stand upon the creed contained in the Symbol of Trent,
we reject the dogmas proclaimed under the pontificate
of Pio Nono as contrary to the doctrine of the church
and to the principles which have prevailed since the
first Council was assembled by the apostles ; we more
especially reject the dogma of infallibility and of the
supreme, immediate, and ever- enduring jurisdiction of
the pope.

2. We adhere to the old constitution of the church.
We repudiate every attempt to restrict the right of the
individual bishops to direct the religious concerns of
their respective dioceses. We repudiate the doctrine
contained in the Vatican decrees, that the poj)e is the
only divinely-appointed exponent of ecclesiastical au-
thority, such doctrine being at variance with the Canon
of Trent, which teaches that the hierarchy consists of
bishops, priests, and deacons, and that this hierarchy
is instituted by God. We acknowledge the primacy of
the Koman bishops as it has been acknowledged in

ANTI-INFALLIBILITY LEAGUE. 245

accordance with the testimony of Holy Writ, and by
the testimony of the fathers and councils of the old
undivided Christian church. "We furthermore declare :
(a.) That more is required to define dogmas than
the dictum of some temporary pope, backed by the
consent, tacit or expressed, of the bishops, who have
taken the oath of inviolable obedience to their primate.
A dogma to be valid must be in accordance with Holy
Writ and the old traditions of the church, such as they
have been conveyed to us in the writings of the recog-
nized fathers and decrees of the councils. Even an
oecumenical council, though it were- really oecumenical
and possessed the formal qualifications which the late
Vatican Council lacked, would not be entitled to enact
decrees in opposition to the fundamental truths and
the past history of the church ; nor would such illegal
decrees be binding upon the members of the church,
even though they had been passed unanimously. And
we declare :

(b. ) That the dogmatic decisions of a council must
be in conformity with the religious belief of the Catho-
lic people ; that they must agree with Catholic science
and the original and traditional faith of the church.
We reserve to the Catholic clergy and laity, as well as
to theological scholars, the right to pronounce an opin-
ion upon and protest against new dogmas.

3. Availing ourselves of the assistance of theologi-
cal and canonical science, we aim at a reform of the
church, which, in the spirit of the ancient church, is to
do away with the abuses and short-comings now pre-
vailing, and satisfy the legitimate wishes of the Catho-
lic people for a regular and constitutional share in the
direction of ecclesiastical affairs.

We maintain that the reproach of Jansenism is

246 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

unjustly cast upon the church of Utrecht, and that,
accordingly, there is no difference of dogma between
ourselves and that church.

We hope for reunion with the Greek, Oriental, and
Russian churches, the separation of which from the
Catholic church arose without any cogent reason, and
is prolonged without there being any incompatibilities
in dogma between us and them.

If these reforms arc carried out, and the road of
science and progressive Christian culture is steadily
pursued, we expect that the time will come when an
understanding will be effected with the various Protes-
tant churches, as well as with tlic Episcopal churches
of England and America.

4. In educating the Catholic clergy, we deem it in-
dispensable that they should be introduced to the study
of theological science. Considering that the clergy
exercise a great influence upon the intellectual condi-
tion of the people, and that we all are alike interested
in possessing a pious, moral, intelligent, and patriotic
clergy, we deem it dangerous that candidates for cler-
ical honors should be brought up in a state of artificial
seclusion from the culture of the age, as is now the
case in the seminaries and other similar institutions
directed by the bishops. "We demand aTlignified posi-
tion and protection from hierarchical tyranny for the
members of the lower clergy. We deprecate the prac-
tice recently adopted by the bishops, in imitation of
the French law, of arbitrarily removing clergymen from
one parish to another ; (amovibilitas ad nutum.)

5. We are faithful to the political constitutions of
our various states, because they guarantee civil liberty
and the advance of the humanizing culture of man-
kind. We therefore reject, from motives alike con-

ANTI-INFALLIBILITY LEAGUE. 247

nected with the politics of the day and the history of
civilization, the treasonable doctrine of papal suprem-
acy, and promise to stand by our respective govern-
ments in their struggle against ultramontane principles
as reduced to dogma in the Syllabus.

6. As the present disastrous division in the Catho-
lic church has been notoriously brought about by the
so-called Society of Jesus ; as this order is, moreover,
abusing its power, infecting the hierarchy, the clergy,
and the people with tendencies hostile to culture, or-
derly government, and national progress ; and as this
order teaches and inculcates a false and corrupt system
of morals ; we express our conviction thai peace and
prosperity, concord in the church, and the establish-
ment of proper relations between church and society
will be possible only after the injurious action of this
order has been arrested.

7. As members of that Catholic church which can-
not be altered by the late decrees of the Vatican, and
which has had its existence guaranteed and protected
by the various states, we maintain a right to the secu-
lar property of the church.

8. Bearing in mind that in the programme drawn
up at Munich last Whitsuntide* we have already re-
served our right, in the anomalous condition in which
we are placed, to have the ceremonies of the church
performed by priests under ecclesiastical censure ; that
in the same programme some of those priests have
declared their willingness to perform those functions ;
that we are justified, by necessity, in thus going back
to the apostolical times, when there were no distinct
parishes ; that the having recourse to such priestly
action is dependent on local circumstances and indi-

* See above, pp. 232-240.

248 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

victual wants; that until such changes in the law can
be effected as will satisfy these wants, Catholics adher-
ing to the old faith of their church cannot be left with-
out the legal benefit of certain ecclesiastical acts, the
Catholic Congress resolves :

(a.) That in all places where the want is felt, I •■
lar parish priests shall be appointed, the question
whether there is a want being left to the decision of the
local committees.

(b.) We claim to have our priests recognized by the
secular authorities as entitled to perform those
gious functions on which civil rights are based, in
accordance "with the existing legislation of many states,

(c.) The various governments arc to be petitioned
to accord us these rights.

(<].) Having been placed in the condition in which
we find ourselves, every Old Catholic is entitled to ask
foreign bishops to perform the said functions for liini ;
and when the right moment has come, we shall be jus-
tified in procuring a regular episcopal jurisdiction.

The paragraph of the foregoing paper most signifi-
cant of immediate results, is the last, or eighth. It
formed no part of the original draft brought before the
conference by a committee of five great Catholic schol-
ars, led by Dollinger. The thought of the decisive
and almost irrevocable organic separation from that
vast corporation which they had all their lives been
wont to identify with the kingdom of God on earth,
was utterly distressing to them ; and when the addi-
tion was moved, they opposed it with all their might.
Argument and persuasion might have failed to change
their determination. But what these could not have
done was wrought bv the malice of their enemies, blind-

ANTI-INFALLIBILITY LEAGUE. 249

ly working out the plans of God's providence. Eighty
parishes, which very early in the history of the contro-
versy had declared their adhesion to the party of lib-
erty, were lying under interdict ; the dead were refused
Christian burial, and there were none to solemnize the
rites of baptism and marriage. There was no alterna-
tive.

From the beginning, this work had marched on to
this point under the guidance of no human forethought,
its most active promoters seeming bound by a power
that carried them whither they would not. Its chief
human promoters have been, in fact, its enemies,
"howbeit they thought not so." The history of its
brief past helps us indistinctly to forecast its future,
and to prophesy that the main interest of the Pro-
gramme, which proposes to limit this new growth of
religious thought by the Canons of Trent, will be
mainly interesting to the future historian as an his-
toric landmark from which to measure its advancement.

Thus, briefly, ki a single one of its aspects, have we
traced the history of two of the most momentous years
in ecclesiastical history. And if our hearts and sym-
pathies have constantly been with those who in the
great pending struggle have been the champions of
personal and national and ecclesiastical liberty, and of
scriptural and historical truth, we would not do injus-
tice to those on the other side who may have been
fighting for conscience' sake. It is possible for us to
recognize the fact which they behold so clearly, but
which, with happy inconsistency, the "Liberal Catho-
lic " is unable to perceive — that despotism, spiritual
and secular, and falsehood to science and to history,
arc the logical result of the premises with which they

250 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

start. We cannot refuse our respect to a certain moral
dignity in the course of those whose steady advocacy
of the fatal dogmas was not actuated by the spirit of
faction nor by the solicitation and corruption of the
Roman court, but by a steadfast fidelity to those;
wretched principles which find their logical fulfilment
only in just such conclusions. There is something to
admire in the unmoved resolution with which, under
such convictions, they went forward, in the face of
signs of coming disaster that even a child could read.
to enunciate and promulgate the blasphemous dogma
which they were warned would revolt the intellect and
conscience of even Roman-catholic Christendom.

The only parties in the business towards whom it is
impossible even for charity to find some feeling of re-
spect, are the corrupt abettors of the dogma; and
those of its opposers who, having known and declared
it to be a falsehood, nevertheless proclaim their sub-
mission to it, and under the threat of Rome consent to
lend their active aid to enforce upon other men this
"strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.''

THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW

AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS

WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN
THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY
WILL INCREASE TO 50 CENTS ON THE FOURTH
DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY
OVERDUE.

MAY 27 1985

REL -

MAY 9 1360

,

*=±

}

W^

«

a_s_

R 17 1946

tfW

!S4

m

—

*^-

5^Sft

l7Uay'60PW

LD 21-100m-8,,34

/

284720

UNIVKRSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY